DC Delays Batman Incorporated #3

Danscomics · Post by **Danscomics** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 8:45 pm

Even though Diamond has supposedly already shipped these issues to us retailers, I got the following email today from DC.

Out of respect for the victims and families in Aurora, Colorado DC Entertainment has made the decision to postpone the release of BATMAN INCORPORATED #3 for one month because the comic contains content that may be perceived as insensitive in light of recent events. We request that retailers do not make this issue available as previously solicited. Its new on sale date is August 22, 2012.

I don't know how many retailers will get the message, or listen but I know I will and I let all my subscribers know. I will be sitting on any copies that arrive (assuming they actually do) until August 22nd. Just wanted to get the word out so as many people as possible aren't confused if they can't find it tomorrow.

Post by **JohnMayo** » Mon Jul 23, 2012 9:42 pm

Interesting. Please let us know if you can confirm that copies actually shipped. I'd like to think that all retailers would honor that change in the release date for the comic.

BobBretall · Post by **BobBretall** » Tue Jul 24, 2012 9:15 am

the comic contains content that may be perceived as insensitive in light of recent events.

So one month will make this no longer insensitive??

I think it's more: "If we put this out now, the new media is likely to jump all over it & we'll get bad press. In a month, the media will have moved on to another shiny object & we can release this under their radar."

abysslord · Post by **abysslord** » Tue Jul 24, 2012 9:53 am

I think it shows how intelligent companies think people are, and sadly I think they're probably right. Nevermind this book was written months ago.

And the funny thing is they delay this book a month out of respect, BUT KEEP SHOWING THE MOVIE!

Danscomics · Post by **Danscomics** » Tue Jul 24, 2012 11:39 am

JohnMayo wrote:Interesting. Please let us know if you can confirm that copies actually shipped. I'd like to think that all retailers would honor that change in the release date for the comic.

I'm currently going through my order and can confirm that I received the copies I was invoiced for.

Post by **JohnMayo** » Tue Jul 24, 2012 12:28 pm

Danscomics wrote:
JohnMayo wrote:Interesting. Please let us know if you can confirm that copies actually shipped. I'd like to think that all retailers would honor that change in the release date for the comic.
I'm currently going through my order and can confirm that I received the copies I was invoiced for.

My understanding is retailers will be credited for those next week. I suspect that aspects of the story will leak out even if actual copies don't. I respect DC for making this decision.

abysslord · Post by **abysslord** » Tue Jul 24, 2012 2:02 pm

My online subscriber has pulled the issue for me, or at least it shows up as being in my next shipment. That happened with the Mind the Gap #2 recall and it turned out those were in my 'bag' already too, so I guess they didn't get the memo either time.

My shipment is scheduled to be sent on 8/1 so that's not a month away either.

Danscomics · Post by **Danscomics** » Tue Jul 24, 2012 3:30 pm

JohnMayo wrote:
Danscomics wrote:
JohnMayo wrote:Interesting. Please let us know if you can confirm that copies actually shipped. I'd like to think that all retailers would honor that change in the release date for the comic.
I'm currently going through my order and can confirm that I received the copies I was invoiced for.
My understanding is retailers will be credited for those next week. I suspect that aspects of the story will leak out even if actual copies don't. I respect DC for making this decision.

Yes, we are supposed to be. I don't know if they will be reshipping it in a month and we will be told to destroy these copies or if they will just charge us again on the 22nd. Either way I plan to follow DC's wishes and hold on to them. All of my copies are already spoken for by subscribers anyway so I just let them know and they all seem to be fine with it.

ctowner1 · Post by **ctowner1** » Fri Jul 27, 2012 12:20 pm

so did they ever reveal exactly what was in this issue that prompted the delay?

e
L nny

GABE! · Post by **GABE!** » Fri Jul 27, 2012 12:31 pm

ctowner1 wrote:so did they ever reveal exactly what was in this issue that prompted the delay?

e
L nny

It appears to be a school shooting according to Bleeding Cool

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/07/24/ ... the-issue/

ctowner1 · Post by **ctowner1** » Fri Jul 27, 2012 2:35 pm

GABE! wrote:
ctowner1 wrote:so did they ever reveal exactly what was in this issue that prompted the delay?

e
L nny
It appears to be a school shooting according to Bleeding Cool

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/07/24/ ... the-issue/

ah..hadn't seen that. Thanks, Gabe!

e
L nny

Danscomics · Post by **Danscomics** » Sat Jul 28, 2012 4:06 pm

My guess was the scene with the targets on the people walking around on the street, but I missed the page they were talking about. I find the lower page with the hanging school children bleeding from their mouths far more objectionable. I think most people who are going to complain would grab on to that no matter what is going on.

BobBretall · Post by **BobBretall** » Sat Jul 28, 2012 4:14 pm

Danscomics wrote: I find the lower page with the hanging school children bleeding from their mouths far more objectionable.

But, but......

Won't it be in good taste if they wait a month????????

Post by **JohnMayo** » Sat Jul 28, 2012 6:29 pm

BobBretall wrote:
Danscomics wrote: I find the lower page with the hanging school children bleeding from their mouths far more objectionable.
But, but......

Won't it be in good taste if they wait a month????????

It isn't that the material is any less objectionable but that the incident is too recent. So, yes, waiting a month will make a difference as people will have had time to come to grips with the shooting at the movie before reading the comic. Better to err on the side of sensitivity, if any err is even being made, than to unintentionally rub sat in any fresh wounds.

BobBretall · Post by **BobBretall** » Sat Jul 28, 2012 9:21 pm

JohnMayo wrote: Better to err on the side of sensitivity, if any err is even being made, than to unintentionally rub salt in any fresh wounds.

Here's where we can agree to disagree.

My opinion is that it's being done out of fear for negative publicity, not as a result of any sensitivity.