The New York Times has changed its bestseller lists to become format neutral (so it counts e-book sales and doesn’t distinguish between hardcover and paperback)
In news that only matters to publishing nerds, the New York Times has changed its bestseller lists to become format neutral (so it counts e-book sales and doesn’t distinguish between hardcover and paperback), and is now split between young adult books and chapter books written for 8- to 12-year-olds.
Those of you who follow my tumblr closely may know that for many weeks, I have been chasing Bill O’Reilly and promising to destroy him. But now we have been placed on DIFFERENT LISTS.
I can only hope that One Direction catches him.
YOU CAN DO IT, DIRECTIONERS.
(Also I’m delighted that The Fault in Our Stars and Looking for Alaska are both on the list. Thanks.)
I have been ranting about how badly these lists have been organized for years. They still have problems, but I like this much better than before.
Also, I’m really glad to see The Raven Boys made the list!
I still think it would be interesting to have a master list that had all books on it, fiction, nonfiction, ya, middle grade etc. to see which is the book to rule them all.
That list exists, sort of, in the form of the USA Today bestseller list, but there’s a lot of variation in how different publications calculate their bestseller lists. (For a bit of context, Perks is currently #20 on that list; Divergent is #87, and The Fault in Our Stars is #81.)
And I am also glad to see The Raven Boys on the list. And Every Day! And Miss Peregrine!