You learn something every day: NYT Best sellers list is a fraud?

[El Presidente]

I had no idea. 

Not that I am necessarily surprised.....just that I had always assumed that it was based on a mathematical principle.

 

 

 

The TRUTH About the New York Times Best Seller List

1983.

William Peter Blatty, author of The Exorcist, sues the New York Times.

The reason?

Mr. Blatty’s recently released book, Legion, had not been included in the “Best Seller List.” The lawsuit stated that because of sales figures the book should have been included and was only excluded due to negligence or — and this is key — falsehood.

How did the New York Times defend itself?

The Times countered that the highly vaunted Best Seller List was neither mathematically calculated nor was it an objective measure of sales, rather it was “editorial content” and as such was protected as free speech under the United States Constitution.

This defense won in the lower courts.

Mr. Blatty’s lawsuit reached the Supreme Court, which declined to hear the case. Thus, the lower courts ruling stood.

This means that the New York Times Best Seller List — and, indeed by extension, all best seller lists — are editorial (read: opinion or fiction) and not objective, factual content. Therefore, books may be excluded from the list for any reason.

This ruling stands to this day.

Related

 

[rcarlson]

45 minutes ago, El Presidente said:

I had no idea. 

Not that I am necessarily surprised.....just that I had always assumed that it was based on a mathematical principle.

Hardly a secret.  If this eluded, you're not paying attention.  A quick scan of content, sales, and listing says it all.  NYT speaks to an audience.  Its audience.  

[El Presidente]

3 minutes ago, rcarlson said:

Hardly a secret.  If this eluded, you're not paying attention. .  

....guilty as charged 

Fool me for believing a leading media organization would not rig the game 

[NSXCIGAR]

Next you'll tell me the Pulitzer prize is a joke...oh wait.

[Cairo]

They can do whatever they want, but a little footnote at the bottom of the list would have been good:

"Warning:  This bestseller list is not really a bestseller list.  Caveat emptor."

😏

[El Presidente]

6 minutes ago, NSXCIGAR said:

Next you'll tell me the Pulitzer prize is a joke...oh wait.

The difference is that no one cares about a Pulitzer prize (outside of those seeking one). 

 

When ken Purchased "50 Shades of Grey" he did so because it was #1 on the NYT list. 

Now he just feels like a fool. 

...albeit he loved the book. 

[NSXCIGAR]

1 minute ago, El Presidente said:

When ken Purchased "50 Shades of Grey" he did so because it was #1 on the NYT list. 

Yes, but Ken also thought it was non-fiction. 

[Chas.Alpha]

I've often wondered if CA's top rated cigars aren't somewhat based on the amount of full page ad space purchased.

[Carrie Nation]

I dunno. Lots of brands spend tons of cash on ads in CA and never made #1. Ashton, Rocky Patel, JC Newman, Alec Bradley, etc. They've spent sh*t loads upon sh*t loads on double-page advertisements for at least the last decade and never took the top spot once. And plenty of non-advertisers make the top 25 every year. Those facts alone cast doubt that the spots are bought, though it's still a popular conspiracy theory, especially when groups of fanboys don't see their favorites on the list. They tend to take their outrage to the internet. 

 

For those who prefer to stay on topic, here's a good link from Vox talking about a publisher that bought huge amounts of their own books to artificially inflate BookScan's numbers. They saw it as an investment. Talk about trying to game the system... https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/9/13/16257084/bestseller-lists-explained

 

[Ken Gargett]

19 hours ago, El Presidente said:

The difference is that no one cares about a Pulitzer prize (outside of those seeking one). 

 

When ken Purchased "50 Shades of Grey" he did so because it was #1 on the NYT list. 

Now he just feels like a fool. 

...albeit he loved the book. 

you do know that you are nowhere near as funny as you think you are.