Comic Book Resources

DC does not care because they get twice the sales for every unreturned book. They already charged the retailers for the first run. All the "destroyed" copies will no doubt be a "return cover for credit" deal. Then they will ship out the replacement copies and charge retailers for them again. It probably recoups a small amount of the money they are loosing to pulp the unshipped copies of the books.
Does that make it right for "retailers" to revert back into crass hobbyists? No. But DC and Diamond do not have the policies in place to penalize and seem unwilling at this point to do anything about it. The cycle continues.

For me its not the stores that make the industry look bad. After all they are commercial concerns and will try to make a few quid (or a buck) where they can. Its naive to believe that some aren't going to.

What makes the industry look bad is the fact that people are willing to buy the book for the crazy sums of money that are being banded around. Ok so the book will be a bit rarer than the standard issue of ASBaR out and about BUT if you're paying £40 or whatever for a copy do people really think in a few years the back issue market, which is slowly but surely going to the dogs, will actually give them a return on their investiment? When all the fuss has died down I doubt in a few years people will be paying much over the odds for the book just cos you can just about make out some swear words. I suspect there will be more than enough circulating to keep those interested happy.

For me its this crazy speculation that makes that makes an industry that is supposed to be an art form look bad.

Actually, if Hibbs were arguing that the bad actors make the comic industry "look bad", I'd hand him the world's smallest violin and ask for a rendition of the world's saddest song. This doesn't make the industry "look bad" - it just perpetuates the image that the industry is nothing but a bunch of fools with too much money bouncing around frantically looking for the next big "collectible" that will jump in value for no good reason. That doesn't really make the industry "look bad" as "paint accurate picture of what the industry looks like at the moment".

But Hibbs isn't just arguing that - or if he is I'm misreading the argument entirely. What Hibbs seems to be saying is that by not following DC's instructions up the chain, the retailers are pretty much destroying not just their credibility with their own partners and their own customers, but also damaging all the other comic book store retailers relationships with customers and partners, even if they did what was expected of them.

There's a reason that book retailers can get away with setting a "street date" - because they know that most of the bookstores are going to go along with it and the "bad actors" who do break it will be outed and can be "punished" by having their shipments of new books come in after the street date. This event suggests that there are too many retailers out there who will just say "screw the street date - I'm selling what I've got", and so early shipments of comics are a "bad idea" for Diamond or DC or Marvel because it will just piss off retailers who happen to get their shipments later than the shipment.

So I can see where Hibbs is coming from, though I personally think this episode is more a symptom of the deeper problem than the problem itself. On the whole, a lot of comic book stores just aren't very well managed. And they seem to depend on selling one hyped thing after another to maintain their income stream. Here DC just handed those stores some "free money" - something that was going to be hyped on its own no matter what the store owners did. That's a big temptation - especially for a store that exists on the margins.

There's also the fact that the industry on the retail side started to service collectors. Collectors of any stripe want those screw-ups because they're "special" to one degree or another - ask any coin collector, stamp collector or baseball card collector and you'll get the same response. So a counter-argument could be made that those store owners who went along with DC's demand actually performed a disservice to a block of their customers by denying them an opportunity to get ahold of one of these misprints. I think it kind of depends on whether you see yourself as a bookstore owner or a collectible retailer what side you might fall on in that argument - and that of course points to the deeper problem the comics retail market has as a whole...

I don't know. My thinking on the "recall" was that it was a voluntary thing. DC sent it out to shield themselves from complaints that they printed a comic book with dirty words in it (not withstanding the fact that they want the swear words to be legible, just not that legible). They know that the retailers who receive copies will have demand for it and those retailers know that. Okay the dealers jacking up the price for a "hot item" is disgusting but ignoring the recall doesn't phase me for a moment.

They already charged the retailers for the first run. All the “destroyed” copies will no doubt be a “return cover for credit” deal. Then they will ship out the replacement copies and charge retailers for them again. It probably recoups a small amount of the money they are loosing to pulp the unshipped copies of the books.

This is untrue.
Stores paid for these books, whether they received them or not, but are being credited this week, across the board, no stripped covers or returns. No one will have paid for the comics they are selling.

Does that make it right for “retailers” to revert back into crass hobbyists? No. But DC and Diamond do not have the policies in place to penalize and seem unwilling at this point to do anything about it. The cycle continues.

This is true.

Meh, the only thing that "looks bad" about all this is that someone at DC can't blank out text correctly.

As I've remarked before, the kamisama, don't say "revert back". That is redundant because "re-" means "back", so "revert" means "turn back", thus you're saying "turn back back". You don't say "return back" or "regress back", so don't say "revert back".

Hibbs rant at the end of the column basically confirms for me a well-known fact about the comic industry: both fans and retailers can be big babies. I've been just as guilty of this as any in the past, the "I want it NOW!" attitude that keeps my lcs in business. Seriously, if I had any patience I'd wait for every trade and order everything from online sources that cost much less, but at this point I'm not going to throw a fit at the guys who run my lcs just because I don't get something on the week it comes out.

It was an interesting read until he switched gears and got juvenile, calling people (and I quote) "Cunts." is weak, immature, and basically just twists his whole argument around, now making it seem that he is bitter that he didn't cash in on the ebay sales for his store.

I wonder what's worse for his business, his foul mouth and sour attitude or a dozen retailers selling a few copies of a book on ebay?

Not to diminish the truths of the arguments above about sales and the market, but to the OUTSIDER (read; "civilian" in Byrne-speak) the thing that paints the industry as being bad is that there is an ALL-AGES comic that has ACTUAL curse-words being printed and then, laboriously "covered up" (sorta, because the writer/publisher WANT the readers to be able to figure out WHAT those words ARE, they just don't want you to be able to state; "Hey kids, Comics! DC prints comics with F-bombs and C-words in it!"

So, to "mom & pop Redstate", the industry STILL has that "they're seducing my innocent young child" aspect to it , besides the G**Damns being tossed about, which goes against the parochial attitudes (as well as the even creepier "Grown MEN write and draw this filth? For children?!? They're all pedophiles!").

If giant breasts and men in tights weren't hard enough to explain away, this doesn't help matters one iota.

Toss in a $ 4 price tag for most comics, and it's easy for outsiders to wonder WTF is up with the predatory nature of this stuff?

(although... ARE there any kids whose parents buy them COMICS anymore? Are comics even on kids radar? Any retailers out there care to share "new kids in my store" stories?)

X_the_Phantom-Longbox__

"Predatory nature?" "Pedophiles?" There's nothing overtly pornographic in ASSBAR, and there is no way a comic can cause juvenile delinquency or cause a child to be physically harmed. I know you're not writing your own opinion, X, but even people who take extreme offense at swear words in comics would have to concede that point in 2008.

It was my understanding, that Brian was using the profanities, in an ironic sort of way. I can also understand his dismay, it is a bit disheartening, to have done the right thing, and be penalized for it. Since all the bookstores were issued credits for books that they then went out and sold for enormous amounts of money, i do rather hope that DC is able to figure out WHO took advantage of the situation, and at least bill them . Let the stores that did the right thing, and destroyed their copies, receive the credit.

“Predatory nature?” “Pedophiles?” There’s nothing overtly pornographic in ASSBAR, and there is no way a comic can cause juvenile delinquency or cause a child to be physically harmed. I know you’re not writing your own opinion, X, but even people who take extreme offense at swear words in comics would have to concede that point in 2008.

Hence the enigma of comic book fans. Half the time they're saying "we are a mature audience and we demand mature writing!" and the other half of the time say "kids couldn't read this! TERRIBLE!" Yes, I know bad language doesn't equal "mature writing," but the language used in ASB isn't any different from a Scorsese gangster movie, a Tarrantino movie, the average episode of the Sopranos, or the average rap album. Yes, the language is coming out of the mouth of a teenager, but the whole idea of the scene is that she thinks she is invincible -- "this is my turf" -- and trying to act tough. Her act changes rather quickly, I might add. Also, anyone ever hear of the term "shock value?" It can often generate publicity and cash.

As a side note... I read a copy of ASB #10 (no, I didn't download it illegally, and no, I didn't spend $5 or more on it), and despite the "potty language" it is, in my opinion, the best issue that Miller has written so far. I think a large part of it is because Miller focuses on Jim Gordon in this issue -- it gave me a very "Year One" vibe. And the addition of Robin seems to have already smoothed out the G-D Batman a bit.

As for stores making some extra cash by selling the issue -- good for them. Turn lemons into lemonade. Most comic stores could use the extra cash, especially since there really won't face any sort of repercussions from DC. If people are willing to pay $100 or more on a comic that won't be worth a tenth of that come next week, that's their own fault. For example, here in New York Billy Joel recently did two concerts to close out Shea Stadium. Tickets were $100, but that did stop some fools from buying tickets from scalpers in excess of $1000. A newspaper reported that two front-row tickets sold for $100,000! Should the scalpers be held in disdain because they severely gouged the ticket prices? Possibly because you're out of luck if you want cheap tickets, but they only sold the tickets for what other people were willing to pay for them. Same thing with this comic. If the Ebay auction went up to $100 or more for an issue of a misprinted comic book, again, why should that reflect poorly on the seller? Most would've probably sold the issue for $20 or less if that was the highest bid, but a fool and his money are soon parted.

It does stretch credulity to think kids with normal allowances (do kids still get those?) can buy themselves any comics. In 1972 a comic book @ $.20 cost twice as much as a candy bar or 5-stick pack of chewing gum @ $.10. Compare now.

why should there be a penalty? this is capitalism. the stores bought the comics from DC, they can do whatever they want with them. its not like the comic book store is a supermarket and the farmers were like "wait no dont sell those bananas, they have banana cancers, destroy every banana!" just because DC doesnt want their good name sullied doesnt mean the comic stores have to obey.

"(,,,)Not to diminish the truths of the arguments above about sales and the market, but to the OUTSIDER (read; “civilian” in Byrne-speak) the thing that paints the industry as being bad is that there is an ALL-AGES comic that has ACTUAL curse-words being printed"(...)

All-ages? All-Star Batman and Robin is NOT an all-ages book, regardless of Batman's presence in it. What's all-ages about it? Having a famous superhero in a book doesn't make that book "all-ages" anymore - that ship has sailed LONG ago, for better or for worse. Mainstream superhero comics publishers have given up any pretense to being fundamentally kid-friendly, and embraced their older audience's adult preferences, more than a decade ago. Today's DC has Black Adam promoting large-scale berzerker bloodbaths and a supporting character's rape being used as a plot device, while Marvel has their whole superheroic universe split in half over conflicting political beliefs, the Punisher graphically dismembering criminals, Moon Knight graphically ripping supervillains' faces off and the X-Men recruiting minors into an all-mutant "black ops squad" that's allowed to kill. Seriously... forget about superhero comics being "all-ages"; the few truly "all-ages" superhero books being published nowadays are exceptions to the rule - like the "Marvel Adventures" books, "Patsy Walker Hellcat" (highly recommended BTW) and DC's cartoon-based books. Other than that, by and large superhero comics are really not for kids anymore.

Has anythign liek this happened before? Not the blanked out curses, obviosuly, but some book being shipped and then recalled due to content? I would think it wouldn't be that hard for my LCS to 1) sell their copies at list, 2) sell them above list, or 3) sell them anonymously above list.

If DC is indeed shipping out another however-many copies to the store for free, but asking for the extant copies to be destroyed, then it's a goofus and gallant choice. So what will DC and the distributor do if they find out a store sold BOTH the to-be-burned copies and the replacements? What have they done int he past? That's what I'd like to know, and probably some LCSes as well: what's the punishment for this crime?

Gallant has torn up his graphically error-printed ASBAR and is patiently waiting for his replacement shipment, despite losing his customers who want it NOW.

Goofus just sold them for mad ca$h and is now banging Gallant's GF after a lobster dinner.

X_the_Phantom-Longbox__

HammerHeart (and others),

I really SHOULD have prefaced my comments by stating that personally, I don't give a flying fig about swearing in comics - EXCEPT as far as if I were to buy some comics to give to my nieces and nephews I'd have to be VERY aware of what to get them that would pass muster (as well as the critiques of their parents and grandparents, teachers, classmates, whomever else they might show them to, etc...).

My comment makes it known that the AVERAGE Joe off the street doesn't have the in-depth industry knowledge of what comics are what, and goes into a comic shop for a bunch of comics for a kid's birthday or sick-in-the-hospital-after-tonsillectomy convalescence, and... AFTER the sticker shock of the PRICE, has NO idea what kind of heat he might be bringing down on himself depending on what he presents to the tyke.

In the day and age of people getting SUED for selling comics with adult content to ADULTS, what do you suppose would happen if that comic went to a kid whose parents/teacher raised a ruckus?

Poor retailer would be spinning around in a lawsuit with NO idea how he got there.
AND the guy who bought the comic would have family members clicking their tongues at his "oddness" that they all saw "brewing for many years".

Look.
ASBAR is indeed an all-ages comic.
Any comic that doesn't have an explicit tag on it that states "Warning! Adult Content" on it is by nature, an ALL-AGES comic. And as such, better damn well BE accessible to ALL AGES lest their be a great uproar from the masses.
(Much like the "Whizzo Chocolate Company" needing to have a call-out; "WARNING! LOX' VOMIT!" if they wish to avoid prosecution.)

It isn't that comics are now "by default" geared to their adult fanbase.
It's that their adult fan-base never really grew UP and instead demanded that their hobby follow THEM.
And this is coming from a die-hard, 41year-old, 30+ year comic buyer/reader/collector/lover. I KNOW that deep down, I haven't "let go" of this hobby - and have only haltingly inched my way into "adult life".
Sure, I'm married, and everyone believes that I'd be great with kids, even though neither my wife and I desire them (so we have way too many cats), and I hold down a very professional white-collar job which pays for our mortgage and bills and such, but I still have a room dedicated to my love of comics/collectibles and a few characters.

I'm standing up and saying;
"Hello, My name is "X" and I'm hooked on comics."
"Hi. X."

The fact that Moon Knight is ripping faces off in his book might be indicative of this problem.

Now, I KNOW that in the golden and early silver age comics like those from EC had far worse stuff, and it was certainly available to kids.

Look where THAT went.
Sure, it was mostly knee-jerk reactionary behavior from some fear-mongers and over-protective parents, BUT we're kind of entering that same cultural climate again.

We certainly don't want to see a return of a sort of "Comics Code" do we?

So, a little self policing is in order.

A simple call-out warning on the cover (like Marvel's MAX titles) is a simple thing.
Everyone is off the hook (as long as the retailer shelves it away from the ARCHIE and SUPERMAN comics), we're golden.

Am I wrong?

X_the_Phantom-Longbox__

@R.J. Sterling

Kids get enough allowance to buy video games and ipods, I doubt kids are concerned about the price of comics. Kids just don't want to buy (superhero) comics.

I'm reminded of an exchange from The West Wing:

"If they override the veto, we're going to look weak."
"If they override the veto, we are weak."

It doesn't make the industry look bad. The industry does that by being bad. Instead of finger-wagging at the retailers who are exploiting the lack of controls over this, Hibbs should be doing something (or at least calling for action) about the lack of controls over this.

I agree with Phantom-Longbox.
The bad guy here is DC comics.
I thought this was supposed to be more "mature" anyway.
They should have just slapped a label on the front.

I think the retailers who didn't destroy their copies are heroes.

(and I still don't have a copy yet... but there's no way in hell I'm paying the crazy prices they are going for now...)

How is someone a hero for exploiting a loophole in the system for personal profit?

DC was wrong to insist on the books being destroyed. They should put out a warning about the salty language and recommend they should be destroyed, and offer new copies for each destroyed copy, but people who want it should have access to it. If there wasn't a deluge of destroyed copies no one would be willing to spend stupid amounts of money on them. I also don't fault retailers for taking advantage of idiots like that. If no one was willing to pay $40 for the comic then the price would be dropped until it reached a price people would pay for it. Comics are luxury goods, and therefore simple invisible hand capitalism is at play.

I have one question for Mr. Hibbs: How much does his store charge for variant covers (which always carry the same cover price as the regular cover edition) on the day they come out? If he charges more than the cover price, then he is just as complicit in the "negative industry image" that he harangues others for perpetuating. Variant covers, after all, simply achieve their manufactured "collectible status" through their perceived scarcity, just as this misprinted edition of ASBAR #10 does.

In the end, I believe that Mr. Hibbs' anger is misdirected here. The mistake was DC's, not the retailers. DC could have handled this a number of other ways, including: "Hey, you know that copy of ASBAR #10 we just sent you? Please don't sell that book to any children; only to adults. We'll ship you out a 'clean' version (with a new cover perhaps) that can then be sold to all ages. Thanks." And just like that, DC would have wiped out the "black market" for the potty-mouth version. But no, instead they chose a "please pulp" strategy which if anything, simply spurred the collectible market.

For what it's worth, I think worrying about naughty language in modern comics, with their frequent, y'know, decapitations and the like is sorta goofy. You can have people's limbs being torn off, or horrible murders with blood dripping from everywhere, but OHEMGEE if you say some NAUGHTY WORDS. I think the whole situation is more than slightly absurd in the first place.

Any comic that doesn’t have an explicit tag on it that states “Warning! Adult Content” on it is by nature, an ALL-AGES comic.

All-Star Batman doesn't carry the Comics Code Authority Seal, as some of their other books do. Hence, it is not intended to be "all ages." If you know anything about comics, you must be well aware that every "mature" adult content comic does not include "SUGGESTED FOR MATURE READERS" on its cover. And they don't always have giant boobs on the covers, either.

My comment makes it known that the AVERAGE Joe off the street doesn’t have the in-depth industry knowledge of what comics are what, and goes into a comic shop for a bunch of comics for a kid’s birthday or sick-in-the-hospital-after-tonsillectomy convalescence, and… AFTER the sticker shock of the PRICE, has NO idea what kind of heat he might be bringing down on himself depending on what he presents to the tyke.

Whatever happened to personal responsibility? If I bought my son/nephew/cousin/wife/girlfriend/neighbor a gift and the gift ended up being WILDLY inappropriate, that's MY fault for not researching the gift. If my nephew is a huge fan of Captain Jack Sparrow and I buy him wildly inappropriate Johnny Depp movies for a gift, am I not the fool for not looking into the actual content of what I am giving him? Sure I am. Plus I'm a real lazy gift-getting.

So let me get this straight... listing an item on ebay with a starting bid of $0.99 and letting it get to $100+ is evil? clearly people wanted to pay that much for it and as a result they did.

Does no one here understand that the Batman issue in question was pulled and credited to the stores? Shop owners who sold this book are getting the misprinted ones and the REAL one but are only paying for the real ones. So everyone who keeps defending shops and blaming DC need to realize the shops basically stole the misprint issues and then proceeded to sell them. How does that make what the shops do correct?

Well, since the option was never given to the shops maybe.... but that option was never given to the shops. So, if the shops pay for the books all would be kosher, correct?

It was an interesting read until he switched gears and got juvenile, calling people (and I quote) “Cunts.” is weak, immature, and basically just twists his whole argument around, now making it seem that he is bitter that he didn’t cash in on the ebay sales for his store.

That was the (in my mind, ill-advised) stylistic choice to write the column as if it was an issue of All-Star Batman that I mentioned earlier.

I know my shops sold them and they also informed Diamond and DC that they had... They also stopped selling them when they found out... seems they didn't receive the letter that was bandied about the interenet.

Well, since the option was never given to the shops maybe…. but that option was never given to the shops. So, if the shops pay for the books all would be kosher, correct?

The option was never given to the shops?

They were specifically told that they would have the issues replaced on the 28th.

They decided to take their credit and sell the books anyways, despite DC asking them not to and warning them that they'd be punished if they were found to be selling them.

They did it anyways.

@Brian Cronin... that also makes his argument less likely to be listened to

know my shops sold them and they also informed Diamond and DC that they had… They also stopped selling them when they found out… seems they didn’t receive the letter that was bandied about the interenet.

DC sent an e-mail out to all stores well before the book's release.

If they did not read the e-mails DC sent out (with a fairly explicit title, I think, too), then that is not a point in their favor.

That they did stop when they finally read the e-mail IS a point in their favor.

I don't care,if I could have gotten a copy of this first print at cover price,or even half cover price, because after getting burned on issue #1, I swore to never again buy a copy of ASBM.Also, I've discarded the first issue from my collection.Considering all the bad word on the net,on this book, i'd say theres a 50/50 chance this was done for promo.Only a chump would pay a penny more then cover price. the stores love such a gaff!

All Star Batman is not all ages.

Anyone insisting it is is just looking for a fight.

And previous poster Dave, if words offend you so, why not try Owly. It has no words.

@Anonymous,

[i]All-Star Batman doesn’t carry the Comics Code Authority Seal, as some of their other books do. Hence, it is not intended to be “all ages.” If you know anything about comics, you must be well aware that every “mature” adult content comic does not include “SUGGESTED FOR MATURE READERS” on its cover. And they don’t always have giant boobs on the covers, either.[/i]

Sadly, I haven't read a DC comic in a few years (Starman & Hellblazer were the last two that I had on my list before the "big culling". I read Starman to the end of the run but dropped - sadly - Hellblazer a couple of years ago), so I completely FORGOT about DC's still using the CCA seal on it's comics.

BUT, for DC to NOT have ANY KIND of warning on ASBAR is, for lack of a better word - or to use ASB's OWN word; retarded.
BATMAN is an ICONIC character, and while he HAS been in comics that are NOT for kiddies, those are USUALLY "Elseworlds" titles and also usually HAVE a disclaimer (at least so I believe).

As for Boobs on the cover... well... the Miller variant covers (like that WonderWoman cover) of ASBAR are pretty raw looking for little Timmy.

[i]Whatever happened to personal responsibility? If I bought my son/nephew/cousin/wife/girlfriend/neighbor a gift and the gift ended up being WILDLY inappropriate, that’s MY fault for not researching the gift. If my nephew is a huge fan of Captain Jack Sparrow and I buy him wildly inappropriate Johnny Depp movies for a gift, am I not the fool for not looking into the actual content of what I am giving him? Sure I am. Plus I’m a real lazy gift-getting.[/i]

Buying a gift based on a kids' likes can be a double-edged sword, since, like ASBAR, many properties have other ancillary instances (or in your analogy - artists who work in non-comparable bodies of work) and as such, some research IS needed.

Of course, it might not be a "Gift" , but a spur of the moment "Hey! Comics! I remember these!" type of things. Batman used to be my favorite. That crazy bat-mite was a hoot!

HOWEVER, if you haven't SEEN a comic book in ages, but recall that YOU liked reading them when you were a kid (in MY case, that would be the 1970's) and you just blindly bought ASBAR off the rack because it was BATMAN, and HEY! It's even BETTER than a REGULAR Batman comic, it's ALL-STAR BATMAN, and presented that as a quick pick-me-up to Timmy who had his appendix removed (or whatever) you'd soon get an earful from his mom about just WHAT THE HECK kind of crap do you THINK you're exposing her son to?

Personal responsibility is fine and I agree that you SHOULD have an idea about what it is your buying.
But to that end, a DISCLAIMER answers that problem rather handily.

Not everyone even KNOWS to LOOK for that tiny "CCA" stamp of approval.
So how would they even KNOW that it's NOT there on many covers?

Just my two cents of playing 'devil's advocate".

Personally, I likes me some boobs and cuss words.
The more the merrier.
(especially the boobs)

Just maybe NOT in a comic without a sufficient warning.

And I DO agree. The violence in comics is getting reDICulous.

X_the_Phantom-Longbox__

@ Alan Coil,

No. Not looking for a fight.
Just saying that without any advanced warning on the cover to some of the language and such (even G**Damns are offensive to some) then it HAS to be EXPECTED by the "civilian" man-on-the-street to be indestinguishable as a regular issue of Batman.

Just sayin'.

X_the_Phantom-Longbox__

and who said that "cunt" and "fucking" were any worse than "goddamn"
I know several Christian-types who find G-D much more offensive.

@Michael:
I think the stores are the heroes b/c I don't have a copy of the contract in hand, so I don't know if it's technically "wrong." To me, it's like I bought a video on ebay to sell in my store... I paid, the seller shipped, I got the item, but he didn't realize there was a personal sex tape at the end of the video.

He can't just say, "destroy it, I've already put another one in the mail to you." and expect me to just do it.
Sure, it'd be nice, but I'm not obligated.

DC doesn't own the stores. I say the books belonged to the stores to do with what they like, and I say good for them for not standing in the way of people getting what they want.
(still not having a contract in hand)

And, I'm sorry I don't know to whom to direct this, but I agree with the sentiment of parental responsibility expressed above. If anyone was upset b/c their child might have gotten one... it's your own fault. Maybe it'd be nice for the stores to not let my child buy inappropriate material... but it's still the parent's responsibility. If a parent had even read the first issue of this series, I imagine it would have already been on the you-are-not-allowed-to-have-this list.

I love this. "We didn't want you to be able to read all the words that we printed in the latest issue of Batman. We just found out you can read the words we printed. Please destroy it instead of profiting off of it and laughing your ass all the way the bank." Of course the comic shops are right to sell them at a mark-up. If DC didn't want people to read those words, they shouldn't have printed them. The question, as always, is "Where are the editors?"

And of course ASBAR is an all-ages book:
a: It's a Batman comic-book that doesn't specify otherwise.
b: Many issues show a smiling young boy hanging out with Batman on the cover, having a great time.
c: It's drawn by an fan-favorite artist whose work has always appealed more to kids than adults.

And "cunt" is more offensive since it's a word used pretty-much exclusively by misogynists. I paraphrase Oprah Winfrey: "The best indicator that this is not a good guy is if you ever hear him say the c-word. The second you hear that word, leave and don't look back." Take that advice, DC.

By Oprah's thinking no woman should ever date Jeff Goldblum since he said the dreaded 'c-word' twice in Death Wish. While raping and murdering an old lady I might add

I think she meant in real life, AG.

Of course the comic shops are right to sell them at a mark-up. If DC didn’t want people to read those words, they shouldn’t have printed them.

It was a printing error.
The printer messed up.
Quite common.
As such, DC didn't print the words for people to be read.
Also quite common for publishers request misprinted copies not to be sold.
Pretty sure comics is the only place a shop would continue to sell the misprinted copy, and definitely the only one where people would be praising those who did.

I'd be very surprised if the shops doing this aren't in breach of contract.
I think it would be in the industries best interest if DC sued.
Teach the shops the a very similar lesson to Marvel learned when the shops sued them.
(Of course this won't stop idiots in the peanut gallery showing how little they actually understand about anything, but that's hardly new).

The question, as always, is “Where are the editors?”

Probably shocked that after they proofed the issue, the printer messed it up and didn't tell them, until it was already shipped.

I wonder if DC will be screwed over by the printer on this - pretty sure the printer isn't going to want to give them credit on a book that is still being sold.

This is all a storm in a teacup. If I had a comic shop I'd probably sell at least a couple of them

To prevent this from happening, maybe the letterer should not write the words. Maybe just leave a space for the word to be blacked out.

This is one recent "industry crisis" that I'm finding myself almost totally incapable of generating even the slightest emotional reaction to, one way or the other. I don't know, maybe it's "outrage fatigue" or I'm saving the ire energy for something more consequential.

Yeah this is a pretty stupid thing to argue about. I can understand people thinking that children don't already know and use the offensive language. I can understand not wanting the few sheltered children who haven't, to learn that language.

But really? It's just a couple words, how about we worry about something that actually matters.

For the record, I know a Comic Shop owner, he continued to sell the book, didn't mark it up.