New York Times to Ted Cruz: Drop Dead

PJMedia ^ | 7/9/2015 | M.Walsh

[VinL]

The New York Times informed Harper Collins this week that it will not include Ted Cruz’s new biography on its forthcoming bestsellers list, despite the fact that the book has sold more copies in its first week than all but two of the Times’ bestselling titles, the On Media blog has learned.

Cruz’s “A Time For Truth,” published on June 30, sold 11,854 copies in its first week, according to Nielsen Bookscan’s hardcover sale numbers. That’s more than 18 of the 20 titles that will appear on the bestseller list for the week ending July 4. Aziz Ansari’s “Modern Romance,” which is #2 on the list, sold fewer than 10,000 copies. Ann Coulter’s “Adios America,” at #11, sold just over half as many copies as Cruz’s book.

“A Time For Truth” has also sold more copies in a single week than Rand Paul‘s “Taking a Stand,” which has been out for more than a month, and more than Marco Rubio’s “American Dreams,” which has been out for six months. It is currently #4 on the Wall Street Journal hardcover list, #4 on the Publisher’s Weekly hardcover list, #4 on the Bookscan hardcover list, and #1 on the Conservative Book Club list.

This week, HarperCollins, the book’s publisher, sent a letter to The New York Times inquiring about Cruz’s omission from the list, sources with knowledge of the situation said. The Times responded by telling HarperCollins that the book did not meet their criteria for inclusion. ”We have uniform standards that we apply to our best seller list, which includes an analysis of book sales that goes beyond simply the number of books sold,” Times spokesperson Eileen Murphy explained when asked about the omission. “This book didn’t meet that standard this week.”

So there.

[timestax]

[timestax]

[Desron13]

The NY Times? I thought they were already out of business. Who’s buying that rag anymore?

[timestax]

[aquila48]

Bookmark

[Cold Heat]

I think a significant number of people look to those lists for reading suggestions

....and therein lies the problem regarding exposure to all points of view.

[kevao]

Who’s buying that rag anymore?

People with birds.

[LS]

As a NYTimes #1 bestselling author for 4 out of 5 weeks, with a second book that got to #30 on the NYTimes, my publisher helped me get insight on how the list works. First, it isn't just numbers sold because the list tries to guard against hyper-supporters of a book buying tons . . . But in just 2-3 cities. Think Democrat Ft. Worthless Jim Wright who sold thousands but only in his district, probably most of which he bought through beards.

The NYT DOES more heavily weight cities, and only counts Bookscan (Barnes & Noble, Amazon) which works against smaller independent stores.

Second, the sales (to my chagrin) have to be pretty compact in a time frame. My "48 Liberal Lies" sold over 55,000 copies, but spread over six months.

Trust me, if Cruz or any author had the numbers, they won't keep him off. BTW, Rubio's book sold 30,000 total, Christie's book a couple of thousand, Carson's books total have sold a couple of hundred thousand, Hillary's first book did 1.5m, and Trump's books combined are well over 2m.

[pops88]

Oh please help me figure out how to read the Kindle copy I bought. It was such a tough choice at CMU back in the ‘70s, but the computer department was just too cold for me to switch majors, so I’m just completely helpless now and still stuck trying to choose N,S,E or W. I’m just another dumb, helpless woman in fly over country I guess. (do I need the sarc tag?)

[timestax]

[Pearls Before Swine]

Thanks for your perspective and insights.

[timestax]

[timestax]

[olezip]

The New York Times informed Harper Collins this week that it will not include Ted Cruz’s new biography on its forthcoming bestsellers list, despite the fact that the book has sold more copies in its first week than all but two of the Times’ bestselling titles, the On Media blog has learned.

Just more evidence that the New York Times is moribund. The NYT has been providing selective bestselling titles for years. Who wants to use information that is selective according to the whims of the NYT? They cannot be trusted.

Is there an honest and straight-forward listing of best sellers somewhere in some publication?

Do we need the NYT or any publishing company to tell us what to think and what to like? Can you make up your own mind without the NYT?

[timestax]

[EvilCapitalist]

People who need to line the bottom of their bird cages. Or people who are house breaking their dogs.

[austinaero]

A few of my friends are authors. The stopped mentioning the NYT best seller list long ago. However, they keep track of their ranking on Amazon, both the sales AND the reviews.

NYT is a dinosaur that only the stuffy, snooty, Obama-butt sniffers care about. It’s not a world class platform anymore.

[Fiddlstix]

The New York Times:

Always Ready To Stab Conservatives In The Back!

[timestax]

[null and void]

"We have uniform standards that we apply to our best seller list, which includes an analysis of book sales that goes beyond simply the number of books sold," Times spokesperson Eileen Murphy explained when asked about the omission.

Zatso?

Let's see these standards, shall we?