Intriguing!
Posted by djvdakota (Member # 2002) on :
Well! What a revelation. I'm going to write my local paper to see if they'll consider publishing a more accurate listing than the NYTimes.
Posted by Kolona (Member # 1438) on :
What that tells me is that book sellers have a power they're not using. If they actually added the titles that are sellling well but not in the pre-ordained list, the final product might be worth something.
Posted by EricJamesStone (Member # 1681) on :
It sounds like they are still using a pre-20th Century technique.
What major bookstore these days doesn't track sales of books via computer? If the New York Times wanted an accurate list, I'm sure the actual sales information could be collected and aggregated, and it would probably be easier than the current method.
Posted by Survivor (Member # 213) on :
EJS has hit on the key problem. "If the New York Times wanted an accurate list," it would be simple for them to use any of a number of far more accurate methods.
Posted by JK (Member # 654) on :
Wow. Another piece of my naivity falls away.
JK
Posted by Kolona (Member # 1438) on :
Are there two JK's here? One Mr. "Improper spelling bugs the hell out of me" and one Mr. Naivity? (Sorry, I couldn't resist. )
)