NY Times Strikes Again

[plinsenmayer]

Original Yahoo! HPFG Header:
No: HPFGUIDX C7595
From: plinsenmayer
Subject: NY Times Strikes Again
Date: 8/22/00 11:15 pm  (ET)

Hi:

Well, this really tops it all. Smitster was kind enough to forward to
me an article from the Wall St Journal on Monday. It seems Scholastic
has decided to try & re-classify the HP books as both "adult" AND
"childrens." This decision follows close on the heels of the salon.com
article from last week in which Editor-in-Chief McGrath said it was up
to each publisher to tell the NY Times Book Review whether a book was
"adult" or "childrens." If I'm Scholastic -- this is an easy call to
make. Seems they thought so too.

But, wait. McGrath, it seems, *really* didn't mean quite what he said
last week after all. No, no, no. No, what he *really* meant to say was
that the Book Review makes the ultimate decision about where the books
will be listed. Scholastic said, we're reclassifying the paperback
version of CoS first. They told McGrath that it's not a "childrens'
book, so now what will you do with it?"

Quote -- "Not much, admits McGrath. We will try & oblige but we always
make the call. In the case of books that appeal to all ages, he said
he will lean on direction from the publisher, but in this case he was
unsure. "What we do in this case I don't know. We'll need to consider it."

What a hypocrite!!!!! "In *this* case"!! Hello?? I hope Scholastic's
lawyers seize on that one. What a blunder to make in print.

The article goes on to quote a mkting study that shows 43% of the HP
books were purchased by someone over 14.

I fired off another letter to the NY Times -- made *sure* this one was
exactly 150 words so maybe they'll publish it. <g>

Penny