How the world media was alerted to the TATTOOIST literary brouhaha by a lone literary blogger in Taiwan named Dan Bloom way back on September 22 long before the NYTimes article or the Australian articles or the new Guardian article

How the world media was alerted
 to the TATTOOIST literary brouhaha
 by a lone literary blogger
in Taiwan named Dan Bloom
way back on September 22
long before the NYTimes article
 or the Australian articles
 or the new Guardian article

NOTE: The Auschwitz Memorial was not the first to flag concerns about the novel. Literary sleuth and blogger Dan Bloom first blogged about the untruthfulness of the novel in a September 22 post and it is still up with recent additions at

cli-fi-books.blogspot.com

Later on November 8, alerted by Bloom's stready stream of tweets and emails 24/7 sounding the alarm, an editor at the NYTimes bureau in Australia assigned a reporeter to write an article in the New York Times in November and it ran  -- by Christine Kenneally -- and pointed out that the number that Morris says was tattooed on Furman was 34902, but that Furman herself testified that her number was 4562.

Blogger Lisa Hill highlighted errors in the novel back June. After being alerted by Bloom in September she refused to print his comments in her comments section and deleted his comments sounding the alarm because she feared reprisals from the publisher and a possible libel suit if she allowed Bloom's comments to appear on her blog ...but she did write this on her blog at the end:

P.S. 22/9/18 -- ''I have been contacted today [September 22] by a journalist [Dan Bloom] in who says he has proof that there are serious doubts about the veracity of this book.  I will provide further details about that if and when I can.  I cannot print Dan's comments for fear of a libel suit which I cannot afford to chance, so sorry Dan.''