The New York Times has launched a Harry Potter campaign, but JK Rowling is not involved. One of the biggest franchises around the world, The Wizarding World began with the publication of the first book by Rowling, The Sorcerer’s Stone, in 1997. The books were made into a movie starring Daniel Radcliffe in the title role.
Emma Watson took on the role of Hermoine Granger and Rupert Grint as Ron Weasley. Recently, the cast and crew celebrated the 20th anniversary since the first film was released via a reunion special. Fans, as excited as the actors were, gathered to reminisce about the past on the sets of the eight HP films.
Now, a New York Times Harry Potter campaign has caught the attention of fans because JK Rowling, the genius behind the wizarding world, isn’t included. The author was also absent from the reunion and her clips from old interviews were used. For the inexperienced, Rowling has publicly expressed her views that were considered transphobic due to her insinuation that trans women are not women.
As reported by Giant Freakin Robot, the New York Times campaign is going viral on Twitter by those who saw it on the subway as an electronic billboard. The campaign was allegedly done to promote independent journalism. It has a woman on it and it says, “Imagining Harry Potter Without Its Creator.”
There was a video ad in the DC subway today. I’m going to post some pictures of this ad and you’ll try to guess which company is being advertised. The fourth photo is the unveiling.
— T. Greer (@Scholars_Stage) February 17, 2022
Many people have expressed their opinion about not including JK Rowling in the ad campaign. While there was one person who expressed support for this decision, there are many who do not. Check out some of the responses below:
Not a fan of the New York Times, but fuck me, have they confused the worst people on earth, first with the Trojan horse podcast and second with the Harry Potter without the creator ad
— oppressed peoples of a normal island (@deffonottommac) February 21, 2022
The unintended and hilarious irony is that Lianna isn’t imagining anything… Harry Potter doesn’t 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 runs wake ads for Harry Potter without #JK Rowling † Excessive. Rowling has introduced millions of children to books and should be honored and not airbrushed out of history
— Andrew Pierce (@toryboypierce) February 19, 2022
Here are the Harry Potter books without @jk_rowlings input @New York times https://t.co/Hrnzc7j67g pic.twitter.com/aiapPwOTvz
— DrAngi *notabot (@WorkPsychol) February 19, 2022
seems the @New York times has lost the effing plot – this is apparently intended to advertise ‘independent journalism’ – i call it🐂💩 #ISandWithJKRowling
(Harry Potter wouldn’t exist without his creator, you idiots) 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 children. Sharing and anticipating each new book was a magical part of their childhood. Shameful that the @New York times tries to erase the woman who made them, the brilliant one @JK Rowling
— Kelley Paul (@KelleyAshbyPaul) February 21, 2022
It seems that the Harry Potter fans don’t like the New York Times campaign because 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…”
Follow us: Facebook | Instagram | Twitter † Youtube
