Posted 8:52 AM by Gene

When Little Malcolm jumps up and down in his high chair about how difficult it is to find decent blogs, we know what he'll do: putting the bowl of cereal on his head (to give him brainpower), he'll storm up lists of the same blogs we've heard about for the last three years. Indeed these lists are of no useful purpose except to acclimate people who've NEVER heard of blogs -- indeed, who've never heard of COMPUTERS.

Some of the comments, however, are ACCIDENTALLY truthful: "Of course, most blogs are mind-numbingly dull." We needed YOU to tell us THAT, Matt. Or consider these other morsels of wisdom about our favorites (pffh-hh-hh):

STERNO: "Posts can be rambling." (We'll ignore this could be said of most of the SUPERDUPERMEGAGIGABLOGGERS.)

TV NEWSER: "Sometimes reads like the sources are mostly press releases."

GAWKER: "May not play so well if New York is not the center of your universe."

And so on. And so on and so on. And so on and so on and so on. Which reminds us, AGAIN, of something Peter Carlson wrote several years ago:

...[T]here are many reasons for the rise of The List. The top five reasons are:

1) Lists are the easiest way to organize information without actually thinking.

2) Magazine editors are too lazy to think of anything more creative.

3) Magazine editors figure their readers are too lazy to read anything but lists.

4) Magazine readers really are too lazy to read anything but lists.

5) David Letterman's Top Ten lists have warped everybody's mind.

Most magazine lists are, needless to say, totally stupid.