A thoughtful reader left an online comment the other day in which he or she referred to The Slice as "One of the lamest columns in any paper across the country."
It's always nice to have one's hard work recognized.
But I have questions.
How much time would one have to spend surveying the nation's newspapers before making such a claim in an even remotely credible way?
Let's say you chose to follow just one columnist at every paper in the country. Wouldn't that take a great deal of effort? I mean, there are a lot of papers out there. But I don't know my critic personally -- he or she goes by a delightful make-believe name. So perhaps he or she does, in fact, have the time to conduct such media monitoring.
More power to 'em.
But here's my real issue. Why is The Slice just "one of" the lamest and not "THE" lamest?
Who are my rivals for this honor? I'd like to check out the competition.