Harry Potter Book Not Considered for NYTimes Bestseller List

Wasn’t aware of this:

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.






One response to “Harry Potter Book Not Considered for NYTimes Bestseller List”

  1. Trina Lamarche Avatar

    Hello Andy!
    Here are my thoughts on this as they say “rash, indefensible decision”…
    If a book, whether it be a children’s book or not, should have the right of being on the same list as all of other books. Most childrens books aren’t even reviewed! So when they finally publish a really amazing story, like Harry Potter, it deserves to be on the same list. I know there are tons of great books out there, but that doesn’t mean they should take away from other authors because of the genre or for any other reason.
    Personally, I liked all of the Harry Potter books when they came out but thats just my two cents.
    Trina Lamarche

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *