'Best of' Lists Are the Worst (theoutline.com)

Ann-Derrick Gaillot, a writer at The Outline, shares thoughts on listicles about best products in a genre. From the article: National websites with armies of writers are churning out best lists left and right, motivated by affiliate advertising more than the desire to share an opinion. Thanks to them all, I've gotten to try all the bests: just-ok restaurants, ineffective beauty products, slippers I guard with my life. [...] Articles claiming that something is the "best" should be rare, eyed with suspicion by the ever suspicious consumer. But they're not. I would have probably been alarmed to not find at least one article telling me where to find the best desk (wherever it still is). But with the race to find the best at the heart of so much media we consume today, such articles can only be trusted if they come from an established outlet with legitimacy, the same institutions that are slow and struggle to add marginalized people to their ranks.

Comments

o rly ?

[penandpaper]

Here is our best list of reasons why best of lists are the worst!

Re:o rly ?

[thsths]

Yes, and this is why Slashdot is even worse than best of lists.

advertising in disguise

[Anonymous Coward]

Many of these lists are simply paid advertising in disguise. Fake news, so to speak.

the problem

[thebullshitpatrol]

The problem is that doing an ACTUAL best-of list is time consuming, difficult, and above all expensive.

Wirecutter is an incredible site, because they are one of the few that actually does proper analysis of the things they are comparing. Think about how expensive and time consuming it is for a site to buy a bunch of the same type of product and actually draw meaningful conclusions from using a dozen of them side by side.

Re:the problem

[thebullshitpatrol]

Even a site which does domain-specific reviews will likely not be able to put together an accurate side-by-side comparison because most of the products they review are likely lent to them by the manufacturer.

To me, that kind of best-of list is only slightly better than the sites that just regurgitate amazon reviews, because when I'm looking for "best of", it's usually going to be something where there is a qualitative difference that you have to experience all of them together to kind of get a feel for. Headphones are a great example.

Like what does a retrospective "best smartphones" list even do for me other than describe features to me that I could otherwise analyze in the Amazon description? Qualitative aspects like display and camera quality, or speaker quality are only possible with a side by side comparison.

In other cases (i.e., when the functionality of the product is basically commoditized), my concern is usually reliability and durability, which a best of list will rarely/never account for. The best you can do is play the numbers game with amazon reviews.

There are cases where this type of model works very well though. SmallNetBuilder is an example of product reviews that are so quantitative that it is very easy to put together a dynamic list that literally always gives you the products that are the best at a certain metric.

Re:the problem

[thebullshitpatrol]

Not the experience I've had TBH. They describe their test methodology as usually involving several people that test and rate sometimes dozens of different products for a variety of metrics, and usually the main author has some sort of background that qualifies them as knowing what they're talking about.

Most recently, I heeded their recommendation that the AKG Y20U is one of the most well-rounded pair of earbuds under $50. Did not disappoint, and that's coming from someone whose main headphones are all mid-high range sennheisers.

There's not too many sites that will have several people thoroughly listen to 30 different pairs of earbuds and score each of them. There's only one site that does this type of shit for more than a single domain of products without a sacrifice in quality.

Graffiti seen in my local town

[Black.Shuck]

Things I hate:

1. Graffiti
2. Irony
3. Lists

Lists in general

[istartedi]

Whenever I'm on YouTube it's only a matter of time before my related videos get me to some kind of list. It always sucks. It's the signal to turn back or quit and do something else; but I can see how people get sucked in. The siren song of best this/that at the end... I usually catch myself; but I'm older and have had years of experience waiting for the red caboose at the end of literal trains (when they actually still had them) and the "no. 1 song" at the end of those holiday count-downs on the radio (always Stairway to Heaven. Always disappointing). These lists... theyr'e just the 21st century train of boredom; but we don't have to stand here at the crossing gates looking like idiots. There are so many other choices now.

Aaaandd?

[Shotgun]

Was there a point hidden somewhere in that rant that I missed?

This comment is the best.

[Yaztromo]

+5 here we come!

This is news?

[TomR teh Pirate]

I would have thought everybody knew those lists were nothing more than awful clickbait. How did such idiocy end up on /. ?

Nobody understands Click Bait?

[ripvlan]

Seriously -- this needed a study? The whole purpose of these lists is to be Click Bait and drive ad revenue to the web site.

oh wait - the author created an article referencing something stupid to drive clicks to her web site. How very meta !!!