{"id":366,"date":"2025-09-03T23:46:57","date_gmt":"2025-09-03T23:46:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/rwacontest.org\/?page_id=366"},"modified":"2025-09-03T23:49:41","modified_gmt":"2025-09-03T23:49:41","slug":"problematic-content","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/rwacontest.org\/index.php\/problematic-content\/","title":{"rendered":"Problematic Content"},"content":{"rendered":"\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t

Policy for Reviewing Potentially Problematic Content<\/h1>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t

This policy is intended to provide guidelines for reviewing entries for the Romance Writers of America’s Golden Heart and Diamond Heart Awards that potentially contain content that may be deemed insensitive, offensive, or inappropriate to specific cultural groups. The aim of this policy is to uphold and promote the core values of the Romance Writers of America (RWA); it is not to enforce censorship. It is designed to foster an environment of respect, inclusivity, diversity, and cultural sensitivity, which aligns with RWA’s commitment to celebrate and advocate for all voices within the romance genre.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>

Scope<\/span><\/h2>

This policy applies to all persons involved in the Golden Heart and Diamond Heart Awards, including entrants, committee members, board members, judges, administrators, and any other related parties.<\/span><\/p>

Reviewing Guidelines<\/span><\/h2>

Cultural Sensitivity and Respect<\/span><\/h3>

All submissions and reviewers must commit to a high level of cultural sensitivity and respect. It is essential that everyone involved consider the possible impact of a submission\u2019s content on diverse audiences, specifically regarding racial, ethnic, religious, gender, sexual orientation, people with disabilities, or other forms of cultural diversity.<\/span><\/p>

Cultural Sensitivity and the Entrants<\/span><\/h3>

Entrants should consider whether the material within their book could be considered problematic. If an entrant is unsure about the nature of their content, they should consult with a sensitivity reader prior to submitting their book or manuscript.<\/span><\/p>

Cultural Sensitivity and Judging<\/span><\/h3>

As part of their responsibilities, judges are tasked with identifying and flagging any problematic content in the entries that could potentially be deemed as objectionable, offensive, or culturally insensitive. Judges should carefully consider the author\u2019s intent, the overall context of the story, and the potential impact on readers.<\/span><\/p>

Consistent Approach<\/span><\/h3>

All reviewers should employ a consistent and fair approach in reviewing entries, ensuring that each work is evaluated based on its individual merit and not influenced by personal biases or prejudices.<\/span><\/p>

Training and Education<\/span><\/h2>

All judges and involved parties must undergo training in cultural sensitivity, inclusivity, and diversity to ensure they can effectively evaluate potentially offensive or insensitive content. Entrants are welcome to evaluate the training judges receive, but entrants are not required to complete the training.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>

This training should be updated annually to provide all involved parties to keep them updated about the evolving cultural sensitivities and to reinforce the importance of cultural respect and understanding in literary works.<\/span><\/p>

Responsibility and Accountability<\/span><\/h2>

Judges<\/span><\/h3>

Judges are accountable for applying these guidelines in their review process.<\/span><\/p>

Committee<\/span><\/h3>

The committee is responsible for ensuring all judges are trained and familiar with this policy, and that it is consistently applied.<\/span><\/p>

Identifying Problematic Content<\/span><\/h2>

Definition<\/span><\/h3>

Problematic content is any material that may demean, stereotype, or misrepresent a cultural group, promote hate speech or discrimination, or any material that is potentially disturbing or offensive to specific cultural groups.<\/span><\/p>

Handling Problematic Content<\/span><\/h2>

Judges Role<\/span><\/h3>

In the event that potentially problematic content is identified, judges should raise the issue on the rubric when they submit along with a description of the potentially problematic material. Please refer to specific instances within the manuscript including page numbers to ensure evaluation at the next level can happen quickly.<\/span><\/p>

Review Subcommittee\u2019s Role<\/span><\/h3>

Works identified as containing problematic content will be reviewed by a specially appointed review committee. The committee will consist of three people: a member of the RWA contest committee, a sensitivity reader (preferably one who has specialization in the cultural group identified in the problematic content), and an external member of RWA who is not currently a board member, judge, or entrant in the Golden Heart and Diamond Heart Awards. The review committee should report their evaluation of the material to the RWA Contest Committee within 15 business days of the material being flagged.<\/span><\/p>

The Contest Committee\u2019s Role<\/span><\/h3>

The Contest Committee will evaluate the subcommittee\u2019s evaluation and make a final determination. If the sub-committee deems the content problematic, a decision must be made on whether to communicate with the author or their representative to clarify intent, seek an understanding, or disqualify the entrant. The contest committee may decide to disqualify the book from the Golden Heart and Diamond Heart Awards by a two-thirds majority secret ballot vote.<\/span><\/p>

Communication to the Author<\/span><\/h3>

The author or their representative should be notified in a professional and respectful manner about the disqualification, with reasons clearly stated. This communication should uphold the dignity of the author and respect their right to create, while clearly explaining the objections raised in line with this policy.<\/span><\/p>

Training and Education<\/span><\/h2>

Training<\/span><\/h3>

All judges and involved parties must undergo<\/span> annual <\/b>\u00a0training in cultural sensitivity, inclusivity, and diversity to ensure they can effectively evaluate potentially offensive or insensitive content. Entrants are welcome to evaluate the training judges receive, but entrants are not required to complete the training.<\/span><\/p>

Continuous Education<\/span><\/h3>

This training should be updated annually to provide all involved parties updated information about the evolving cultural sensitivities and to reinforce the importance of cultural respect and understanding in literary works.<\/span><\/p>

Responsibility and Accountability<\/span><\/h2>

Judges<\/span><\/h3>

Judges are accountable for applying these guidelines in their review process.<\/span><\/p>

Committee<\/span><\/h3>

The committee is responsible for ensuring all judges are trained and familiar with this policy, and that it is consistently applied.<\/span><\/p>

Policy Violations<\/span><\/h2>

Violations of this policy will be addressed in accordance with the severity of the infraction, and may lead to removal from the review process.<\/span><\/p>

Appeals Process<\/span><\/h2>

Right to Appeal<\/span><\/h3>

Entrants or their representatives have the right to appeal the disqualification decision.<\/span><\/p>

Appeals Committee<\/span><\/h3>

An independent appeals committee should be set up to review appeals. This committee should not include any current judges, entrants, board members, or members involved in the original review or disqualification decision. The formation of the committee will be overseen by the Chair of the DEIA Committee of RWA or their designee. The appeals committee should contain at least one cultural sensitivity reader familiar with the allegedly maligned cultural group.<\/span><\/p>

Appeals Process<\/span><\/h3>

An entrant who wishes to appeal the RWA Award Committee\u2019s decision must do so in writing within 5 business days of being notified that their entry was disqualified. After an appeals committee is constituted, the appeals committee will have 15 days to respond to the entrant in writing. The appeals committee\u2019s decision is final. The appeals process should be fair, transparent, and respectful.<\/span><\/p>

Transparency and Documentation<\/span><\/h2>

All steps and decisions in the review and disqualification process should be well-documented to provide a transparent record of all decision making. This documentation may be necessary for handling appeals or for future reference.<\/span><\/p>

The confidentiality of all parties involved should be respected throughout this process. Personal information and details about the review, disqualification, and appeal should not be disclosed outside the committee unless required by law.<\/span><\/p>

Policy Compliance<\/span><\/h2>

All members involved in the review and judging process of the Golden Heart and Diamond Heart Awards entries must comply with this policy. Non-compliance may lead to removal from the committee, and other consequences as deemed appropriate by the Romance Writers of America’s governing body.<\/span><\/p>

Review and Amendment of the Policy<\/span><\/h2>

This policy should be reviewed at least annually and may be amended as necessary to reflect evolving cultural norms, sensitivities, and legal requirements.<\/span><\/p>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Policy for Reviewing Potentially Problematic Content This policy is intended to provide guidelines for reviewing entries for the Romance Writers of America’s Golden Heart and Diamond Heart Awards that potentially contain content that may be deemed insensitive, offensive, or inappropriate to specific cultural groups. The aim of this policy is to uphold and promote the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"parent":0,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-366","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/rwacontest.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/366","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/rwacontest.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/rwacontest.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rwacontest.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/rwacontest.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=366"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/rwacontest.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/366\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":371,"href":"https:\/\/rwacontest.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/366\/revisions\/371"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/rwacontest.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=366"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}