There are some reasons why every music magazine creates lists at this time of the year.
- The sentimental: it’s the end of the year as we know it, and writers feel they have to take stock.
- The necessary: the only albums released after Thanksgiving are Christmas ones and greatest hits compilations, which are really boring to write about, so magazines need new ideas for feature articles.
- The altruistic: lists help readers make Christmas shopping decisions.
- The selfish: lists are fairly easy to do, giving writers more time for Christmas shopping.
- The lazy: as anyone who’s read High Fidelity knows, many conversations of music buffs are already about naming the top 5 or top 10 in various categories, articles that are just lists let writers copy out their conversations into text.
- The egoistic: every list has one obscure pick, so that writers can show off the breadth of their knowledge.
- The pugilistic: every list has one controversial pick, so that writers can pick fights in which they can show off the breadth of their knowledge.
- The J. Jonah Jamesonian: lists sell magazines, because people like to argue with them, debate them, and write letters and blog posts to complain about what was included/missing.
- The brown-nosing: lists allow you to pack references to the most bands in a short amount of space, thus cementing your relationship with the various PR firms that keep you supplied with free albums and tickets at the will-call counter.
- The capitalistic: maximising the number of performers mentioned also means you can sell more ad space to record companies and other companies that might be interested (“hello Coke, I’m mentioning Lindsay Lohan this week, would you like to buy a full page ad?”).
Having said that, Spin’s idea of listing the top 10 “most accurately rated” musicians (Tone Loc, the New Radicals, Van Halen) is pretty funny. And it’s sad that Lohan’s record comes out under Casablanca records, a label with a more illustrious history.
Tangential links: A compilation of year-end lists.