T U E S D AY, D E C E M B E R 1 2 , 2 0 0 6Save The NYTimes Bestseller List!Sam Tanenhaus, the Editor of the New York Times Book Review istaking questions this week at asktheeditors@nytimes.com.</p><p> Since Iwrite for the NY Daily News, it would be inappropriate for me to weighin, but there's nothing stopping you.</p><p> One issue I'd love to raise withhim: the New York Times bestseller list.</p><p> When Harry Potter was in themidst of its once-in-a-generation heyday, two or three books in theseries seemed to have taken up permanent residence on the bestsellerlist.</p><p> Publishers complained that the Harry Potter books were taking upspace that should go to real books.</p><p> Remarkably, the NYT panicked andremoved children's books from the bestseller list forever.</p><p> One bigreason the Potter books became such a phenomenon was BECAUSEthey broke onto the bestseller list.</p><p> That means immediate sale pricingand front of the store positioning for any title that accomplishes this.This put Harry Potter in front of lots of adults, the book crossed overand the rest is history.</p><p> Other books that might have been far moresuccessful if they weren't kept off the bestseller list include the "HisDark Materials" trilogy by Philip Pullman, "Eragon" which is just aboutto be released as a movie and countless others.</p><p> Imagine how ridiculousit would be if everyone who listed the Top 10 movies over the weekenddecided that animated films were too popular and shouldn't be on thelist.</p><p> That means for the past month, "Happy Feet" wouldn't have beenNumber One at the box office.</p><p> Obviously a list of top-grossing moviesor top-selling books should be just that: a straight-forward list, not anarbitrary inclusion of some titles and not others.</p><p> And of course thefears about Potter were absurd.</p><p> The more recent books have sold somany copies in the first week that they haven't dominated on thechildren's charts the way the early ones did and the same would havebeen true for the main bestseller list.</p><p> So please ask Tanenhaus if he'sconsidering restoring some integrity to the bestseller list and letting itreflect the best-selling books and not just the ones some people thinkare worthy.</p><p> Anything else is a farce and unworthy of the paper ofrecord.POSTED BY MICHAEL IN NEW YORK AT 1:54 PM 3 C O M M E N T S :Next Blog»sal1mineo@hotmail.comSEARCH BLOG FLAG BLOGFOLLOW BLOGP O P S U R F I N G .</p><p> C O MS U R F I N G T H E WAV E S O F P O P U L A R C U LT U R EB Y M I C H A E L G I LT Z & F R I E N D SPOPSURFING.COM: Save The NYTimes Bestseller List!http://popsurfing.blogspot.com/2006/12/save-nytimes-bestseller-... 1 of 37/28/09 2:21 AMFAV O R I T E L I N K SAmericablogFive O'Clock Lightning baseball blogDeep Pop -- Lori Lakin's BlogThe Back Page -- Jason Page on ESPNRadioCine-Blog -- George Robinson's BlogDocuments On Art & Cinema - DarylChin's BlogBrucie G's Wondrous Blog OfAdventure and Mystery -- BruceGreenspan's BlogB L O G A R C H I V E▼ 2009 (17)▼ July (3)1939 -- The Greatest Year ForMoviesSwimming Bans Those Hi-TechSuits!Best Movies Of The Year -- TheMaster List► June (3)► May (1)► March (2)► February (1)► January (7)► 2008 (86)► 2007 (781)► 2006 (2412)► 2005 (5)C O N T R I B U TO R SAaronMichael in New YorkBiboy POPSURFING.COM: Save The NYTimes Bestseller List!http://popsurfing.blogspot.com/2006/12/save-nytimes-bestseller-... 2 of 37/28/09 2:21 AMPOPSURFING.COM: Save The NYTimes Bestseller List!http://popsurfing.blogspot.com/2006/12/save-nytimes-bestseller-... 3 of 37/28/09 2:21 AM
