4 ms·

Honestly this insults the intelligence of readers and it's nothing less then cultural vandalism. Not to mention historical revisionism.

TechBro8615 4y ago
My cynical take is that it's outrage bait to get some old books into the news cycle while having a chance to sell them to people who already own them. They're not removing words for any puritanical reasons, but rather because they know it pisses people off and it's a sure way to get people talking about their books.
- nullc 4y ago
  I think that's actually a more hopeful take than the reality. Instead, I think it's just a stuffed shirt bureaucratic box checkers who knows that no one ever got fired for sending a book to a sensitivity reader engaging in some busy work to pad out their annual review accomplishments. The extremely low quality and incoherence of the bowdlerization shows their total indifference to both the book and any conceivable external agenda of the sensitivity edits. If it was being done to generate controversy at least it would stop when it stopped making them money.
- ctoth 4y ago
  I can't decide if this possibility is worse, but I'm leaning towards yes.
- version_five 4y ago
  It's almost like a variation of Poe's law, where it's impossible to tell whether they're doing it out of some memetic bureaucratic desire to remove all the entropy from the universe, or if they're just trolling.
  - none_to_remain 4y ago
    Always consider the possibility the "por qué no los dos" principle applies: for the actual implementers it's an opportunity to work towards the glorification of the new faith, for their bosses it's an opportunity to market through controversy.
    - TechBro8615 4y ago
      Poe qué no los dos?
- dudul 4y ago
  For another example of this lazy marketing strategy see the garbage live action remakes Disney has been putting out there over the past few years.
beej71 4y ago
They're "vandalizing" their own book. It's not our book. It's theirs to do with as they please. You're allowed to rewrite your own books, too--and even leave the same title on them. At least in the US, the government isn't allowed to stop you. The publisher's reasons are certainly straightforward: 1. Generate controversy/awareness to make more money. 2. Get last-minute books sales of the "old" version to make more money. 3. Get new book sales of the "new" version to make more money.

TechBro8615 4y ago

My cynical take is that it's outrage bait to get some old books into the news cycle while having a chance to sell them to people who already own them. They're not removing words for any puritanical reasons, but rather because they know it pisses people off and it's a sure way to get people talking about their books.

nullc 4y ago
I think that's actually a more hopeful take than the reality. Instead, I think it's just a stuffed shirt bureaucratic box checkers who knows that no one ever got fired for sending a book to a sensitivity reader engaging in some busy work to pad out their annual review accomplishments. The extremely low quality and incoherence of the bowdlerization shows their total indifference to both the book and any conceivable external agenda of the sensitivity edits. If it was being done to generate controversy at least it would stop when it stopped making them money.
ctoth 4y ago
I can't decide if this possibility is worse, but I'm leaning towards yes.
version_five 4y ago
It's almost like a variation of Poe's law, where it's impossible to tell whether they're doing it out of some memetic bureaucratic desire to remove all the entropy from the universe, or if they're just trolling.
- none_to_remain 4y ago
  Always consider the possibility the "por qué no los dos" principle applies: for the actual implementers it's an opportunity to work towards the glorification of the new faith, for their bosses it's an opportunity to market through controversy.
  - TechBro8615 4y ago
    Poe qué no los dos?
dudul 4y ago
For another example of this lazy marketing strategy see the garbage live action remakes Disney has been putting out there over the past few years.

beej71 4y ago

They're "vandalizing" their own book. It's not our book. It's theirs to do with as they please. You're allowed to rewrite your own books, too--and even leave the same title on them. At least in the US, the government isn't allowed to stop you. The publisher's reasons are certainly straightforward: 1. Generate controversy/awareness to make more money. 2. Get last-minute books sales of the "old" version to make more money. 3. Get new book sales of the "new" version to make more money.