By Jennifer 8. Lee | September 26, 2007
Josh Getlin of The Los Angeles Times writes about theÂ expansion of The New York Times bestsellers list to differentiate between trade paperback (the bigger flat books) and mass-market paperbacks (the squatter ones). While the article doesn’t explicitly say this, it’s part of the NYTimes’ desire to value “impact/influence of books” rather thanÂ straight up sales (which the Amazon top 100 list is a better reflection of, despite the bias towards techie and business-y books). For example, when Harry Potter books suddenly dominated the top bestsellers list, children’s books were made into a separate category. The Advice/How To/Miscellaneous category was also pulled out some years back.
Comments are closed.