henry copeland: Guardian, NYT wrong re #hashtag in @Sophia_Amoruso's book title. Unclickable /= unshareable pllqt.it/M2vByzThe New York Times Book Review criticized Amoruso's hashtag, declaring “an unclickable hashtag makes about as much sense as a scratch ’n’ sniff radio commercial”. I agree – up to a point. If the hashtag were in an ebook where I could indeed click through and get more information, that would be more fitting, and that is likely something we’ll see more of as smart publishers embed content that could not have a home in a print book.To my mind, the hashtag is a code which says the author is active online, as opposed to going through the motions of social media because they have been told they “should”. […]I’m far more inclined to buy books from an author who, say, follows me on Twitter or responds in other ways, because I know our communication is a two-way street. As Amoruso told me, her title’s purpose “wasn't to target social media users per se, since at this point nearly everyone is on social media. It was to embed sharing into the title of the book – if someone liked it, they had to share it just by mentioning it”.