As 2010 comes to a close, magazines, newspapers, and blogs are releasing their “Best of the Decade” lists, only to realize nothing good happened in the past ten years.
“This decade really sucked,” Gwen McCreedy at The New York Times Magazine said. “Sure, a lot of important things happened, but do you really want to call them ‘The Best’? It was really The Worst.”
The “Best Of” lists compile significant moments that occurred in the past year, or in this case decade, chronicling events that changed the world. However, this year, no one wants to remember.
“When I was doing research for our list I got so depressed,” Hank Lowell of the Tribune newspaper company said. “All of the natural disasters, wars, American Idol seasons. I can’t take it.”
Since the decade was such a disaster, most lists will instead focus on those serene, carefree months between January 2000 and August 2001, when nothing important really happened.
“The beginning months of the 2000s were kind of boring,” Sal Rubin of Newsweek said. “Tuvalu entered the United Nations. Sydney had the Summer Olympics. Wikipedia launches. Sure, there were bad things here and there, but compared to the rest of the decade? Those were good times.”
“Looking at it from those months makes my job a whole lot easier,” Owen Schwarzbaum of Entertainment Weekly said. “Best Movie: Gladiator. Best Album: Kid A. Best Book: The Corrections. Actually, those can work for the whole decade.”
Some publications have decided to forgo the “Best Of” list since they argue nothing good happened.
“Think about it, the decade starts off with Bush getting elected. That’s a black mark right there,” Al Fusstein of The Atlantic said. “Then you’ve got the Patriot Act, Paris Hilton, Guantanamo, Iraq, autotune, the financial crisis, the death of print journalism. The list goes on and on. I don’t even want to think about it anymore.”
“Plus everyone did these lists last year. That decade is thankfully over. But we’re just lazy and lists are easy, so we’re doing them again,” he added.