3 ms·
Are you suggesting all these books’ publishers or authors might have paid to be on the list? It’s such a vast and varied list that it seems like a bizarre concl
by mypastself 3y ago
Are you suggesting all these books’ publishers or authors might have paid to be on the list? It’s such a vast and varied list that it seems like a bizarre conclusion. Or do you think they’re paid to raise awareness of books in general? Is The Economist in the pocket of Big Book?
- passwordoops 3y agoDon't mean to speak on behalf of OP, but yes, no, yes, and yes.
- mypastself 3y agoSo how would we distinguish a paid-for article about best books of 2023 from a non-paid one? Would we conclude everything is above board only if there’s no such article at all? Seems like a claim that’s bordering on unfalsifiable…
- corethree 3y agoIt's not varied. The economist has a political bent and the list has a bit of this too.
- mypastself 3y agoA pro-free market book but also a few critical of climate change and Big Tech; an anti-Evangelical but also an anti-woke one. Some critical of China but others critical of Japan and South Korea, etc. I’d argue that there’s at least an attempt to cover a variety of viewpoints. But your argument is different from the OP’s. Their argument seems to be that the article is paid for by the publishing industry, while yours is that the newspaper in question has a political bent.
- red-iron-pine 3y agoyeah the political bent isn't a dealbreaker for me, they're not kidding about it, have what I'd call a painfully plain mainstream view on most things, and at least attempt to, most of the time, examine both sides of an issue before picking a side (which will obviously be the free market one). fairly deep looks with standard UK middlebrow takes
- seb1204 3y agoMaybe the PR side is to keep book lists constantly in the news. Also not too sure about OP point.