Publisher’s Weekly has a short article on the three leading “book social networking sites“. (via fadetheory).

Let me say up front, that I am an avid LibraryThinger and that I really think the PW article does a disservice to the reader…

by quickly outlining these three sites. I honestly believe that anyone who has spent more than 20 mins. on any social book site can see that LibraryThing is faaaar superior to the other two.

I recently checked out Shelfari, after I read how they are now tieing into FaceBook. I don’t have a FaceBook acct, but I thought this was a great idea. While reading up on it I saw where LibraryThing has the same plug-in apps in the works. So they all seem to be moving in the same direction. Though LT just seems so much richer and deeper.

I think a lot of this has to do with programs like the new ARC program. How wonderful of an idea is that? It just seems like a win-win to me. LT just seems to offer more and think about their users more than the other sites. Of course, with Amazon’s deep pockets, I guess Shelfari could pass LibraryThing one day, especially if LT growing pangs increase (I know their site was down at least 5 days this month).
I know the article was written to be “unbiased”, but in doing so, I really think they missed the mark in trying to inform their readers of the breadth these new sites offer.