We need to start over in Civil War history.
What does that mean?
Take all the new research and analysis since the Centennial together with the complete record of source material and build anew.
Some authors are doing that; it's happening topic by topic. But it's not happening broadly enough. And the old guard is shouting "stop the madness." The old guard is bypassing new research and new analysis to reconstruct history from selected old source material to reach conclusions our granparents would be familiar with.
In doing so, they can present old, incomplete source material as representing the best thinking of today when it was the best thinking of 60-80 years ago.
As readers, it's our job stop this. It's job one for us.
When an author cites no secondary sources but goes back to the OR to write an account of this or that, when the OR cited is selective and dishonest, when the author claims no influence from major recent books (or if that influence is not visible in the work), put that author's book down, ignore it, and mark the author as unworthy of further reading.
Mark the author no matter how big the name, how impressive the prizes.
You may not want to shame them but you can certainly ignore them.