Follow Us
Join Us
A Harry Potter campaign has been launched by the New York Times, but it doesn’t include JK Rowling. One of the biggest franchises across the globe, the wizarding world, started with Rowling publishing the first book, The Sorcerer’s Stone, in 1997. The books were made into movies that starred Daniel Radcliffe in the titular role.
Emma Watson took up the role of Hermoine Granger and Rupert Grint as Ron Weasley. Recently, the cast and crew celebrated the 20th anniversary since the first movie was released through a reunion special. Fans, who were as excited as the actors, came together to reminisce about the old days on the sets of the eight HP movies.
Now, a Harry Potter campaign by the New York Times has caught the attention of the fans as it does not include JK Rowling, the genius behind the wizarding world. The author was also missing from the reunion, and her clips from old interviews were used. For the unversed, Rowling has publicly expressed her views that have been perceived as transphobic due to her insinuation that trans women are not women.
Trending
As reported by Giant Freakin Robot, the New York Times campaign has been going viral on Twitter by those who spotted it in the subway trains as an electronic billboard. The campaign was reportedly done to promote independent journalism. It features a woman and reads, “Imagining Harry Potter Without Its Creator.”
There was a video ad in the DC subway today. I am going to post some stills from this ad, and you will try to guess what company is advertising. Fourth photo is the reveal.
— T. Greer (@Scholars_Stage) February 17, 2022
Many people have expressed their thoughts over not including JK Rowling in the ad campaign. While there was one person showing support for this decision, there are many of those who don’t. Check out a few reactions below:
Not a fan of the New York Times but fuck me have they rattled the worst people on earth firstly with the Trojan horse podcast and secondly with the Harry Potter without it’s creator ad
— oppressed peoples of normal island (@deffonottommac) February 21, 2022
The unintended and hilarious irony is that Lianna is imagining nothing… Harry Potter does not exist without JK Rowling… Lianna's head is empty and The New York Times is happy. Perfect. pic.twitter.com/eHj3QYVmt1
— AR-82 (@MegaTechCorp82) February 19, 2022
the #NewYorkTimes is running woke ads' for Harry Potter without #JKRowling . Outrageous. Rowling has introduced millions of children to books and should be honoured not airbrushed out of history
— Andrew Pierce (@toryboypierce) February 19, 2022
Here are the Harry Potter books without @jk_rowlings input @nytimes https://t.co/Hrnzc7j67g pic.twitter.com/aiapPwOTvz
— DrAngi *notabot (@WorkPsychol) February 19, 2022
Seems the @nytimes has lost the effing plot – this, apparently, is meant to advertise 'independent journalism' – I call it🐂💩 #IStandWithJKRowling
(Harry Potter without its creator wouldn't exist, you morons) https://t.co/YE1prPffv3— Caz Bailey #KPSS – #NotABot #WomenWontWheesht (@mrs_counter) February 18, 2022
I have wonderful memories of reading the Harry Potter books to my kids. Sharing them and anticipating each new book was a magical part of their childhood. Shameful that the @nytimes is trying to erase the woman who created them, the brilliant @jk_rowling
— Kelley Paul (@KelleyAshbyPaul) February 21, 2022
It seems like the Harry Potter fans are not liking the New York Times campaign as they claim that there will be no HP without JK Rowling. Share your thoughts on this with us!
Must Read: Uma Thurman On Playing Arianna Huffington In ‘Super Pumped’: “When A Woman Is In This Position…”
