4 ms·
I think the WSJ owes Mrs. Chua an apology. Come to think of it, if they actually do release an apology, it will probably serve as an additional boost to the bo
by itistoday 16y ago
I think the WSJ owes Mrs. Chua an apology.
Come to think of it, if they actually do release an apology, it will probably serve as an additional boost to the book's sales.
It makes me wonder whether the author of the original piece was just an inconsiderate asshole, or an evil genius who's getting a slice of the pie and planned out the "lie" and apology in advance as a marketing stunt. Either way, there's an idea. Don't recommend it though. :-P
- kmfrk 16y ago> (...) it will probably serve as an additional boost to the book's sales. I don't know; the book's only received negative attention by my perception.
- jerf 16y agoThere is a such thing as bad publicity, but there's a reason we say there isn't: Because it's mostly true. Sounds like the book is doing way better than it ever would have on Amazon without this little kerfuffle.
- jamesaguilar 16y agoIt doesn't take a whole lot of looking to find that your perception may be non-standard: http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/books http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/books
- p_nathan 16y agoI think - supposing that Mrs. Chua was grossly misrepresented, which seems a bit likely - that the WSJ owes her a public apology and the opportunity for a rebuttal piece.