"It happened in 2000. The Harry Potter books -- a once in a lifetime publishing phenomenon -- were dominating the bestseller lists, with three titles ensconced in the Top 15 at the same time. It just wasn't fair, moaned publishers of more "serious" fiction. It kept more deserving titles off the list, titles that people would never hear about, said bookstore owners. And so in a rash, indefensible decision, the New York Times decided to banish children's books solely to their own separate list." (Giltz, HP, 7/20/07)
Looks as if there may be a grass roots effort in the making.
Tags: Harry Potter, NYT best sellers list, Huffington Post, Michael Giltz
2 comments:
Your posts in my RSS reader aren't full text anymore. Boo hoo. :(
Oooops! I was messing around with the new feedburner feed re-routing/re-directing/feed-mashing thingamabob earlier today and changed the setting from "full" to "short."
It is back to "full" again.
My bad.
Post a Comment