Thanks for Including Me on Your Stupid List

Never miss a glorious update - click here!

On Clickbait, Assisted Self-Aggrandizement, and the Arbitrary Nature of Subjective & Objective Litany

Every year, in late December or early January, you start seeing three distinct types of fitness posts: those wrapping up the current year; those making predictions for the coming year; and lists of all the fitness professionals who either killed it last year or will kill it this year.

I’m going to discuss that last item, for the undeniable reason that these lists are bullshit.

Let me start by saying that I want you to read this post as a sort of commentary on the industry and its practices, rather than as a rant. A rant would require me to be worked up about something. I’m not worked up1, I’m mostly just incredulous that no one has pointed any of this out yet. 

Normally, I don’t engage when these lists come out. I rarely read through to see who’s included, and I almost never re-post them on social media. The main reason I don’t bother sharing them, other than thinking they’re patently stupid, is because I personally feel that (given my frequent inclusion) to do so mostly just comes off as self-congratulatory at best and public masturbation at worst.

Sure, I could do what everyone else does and tell you how surprised and flattered I am to be included, but I find false humility to be at least as irritating as self-aggrandizement, and usually more—so I’ll forego the whole aww shucks routine for myself, even as everyone else rushes to share.

On that note, I do feel compelled to acknowledge that all the social media auto-fellatio provides a great opportunity to mock observe those who seem not to have a firm grasp on the words they use. 

Bro. You are not “humbled” to be included on some random list. You are “honored,” or perhaps “feeling undeserving.” 

To be humbled means to have your standing reduced; you are using it when your standing has been elevated.

Here’s an example of the word used properly:

“I thought I was strong, but then this dude humbled me by warming up with my max.”

More or less, to humble someone means to force humility upon them; to demonstrate to them, by word or by deed, that they’re not quite as impressive as they seem to think. To be humbled by something is rarely an enjoyable experience.

As a final aside, if the word humbled actually did mean what you think it means, re-posting the list you’ve been added to on your social media channels very clearly indicates that you do not, in fact, feel underserving of having been included.

So, really, you’re stupid twice. Congratulations. 


My goal here is not to make fun of anyone. Rather, I’m looking to open up a dialogue about these lists in general, if only to make people aware that not all of those “honored” with placement are worth checking out or following. That is, being featured on some list doesn’t necessarily qualify someone to help you.

Let’s get to the point: I was featured on this list by Greatist, published today. So were 99 other people. All of us were made aware a few weeks in advance, and then again today.  

[[Photo Credit: Greatist.]]

[[Photo Credit: Greatist.]]

Again, I don’t like false humility, so let me be blunt and say that I believe my name belongs on such lists. I’ve earned it. So, yeah, it’s cool, and a nice little feather in the cap. But ultimately meaningless.

As mentioned earlier, these lists are bullshit. I want to tell you why.

These lists come in two forms: subjective and objective; let’s take a look at each on in turn.

Subjective Lists

These lists are usually found on personal blogs. Basically, some blogger puts together a list of bros who they personally think are the best, or the most awesome, or the most influential, or whatever else. 

They’re subjective because everything from inclusion to placement is based solely on the opinion of the author. Which is fine, as it’s a personal blog. (Note that because RFS is no longer a single person blog, everything I write here is exempt from this, and should be taken as universal #truthfact.)

But, we can’t really take these things too seriously. Especially because they’re sort of advertising—it’s a hilariously old but evidently still effective trick to get traffic to your site.

Here’s the breakdown:

  1. Create a list of awesome people. Call it something like 100 top personal trainers of all time.
  2. Post it on your blog.
  3. Contact the people on the list and let them know they’ve been featured.
  4. Watch as these people get excited that you—who have no authority at all—added them to a list, despite this list being made with no discernible thought and no metric for measuring quality, influence, or anything else.
  5. Giggle as the majority people send traffic to your site to let their fans know that you, who represents no governing body, thinks they’re awesome.
  6. Collect opt-ins.
  7. ????
  8. Profit.

Okay, okay. The thought process behind the lists aren’t generally as mercenary as all that. Sometimes it’s just easy “content” or a way to get on the radar of those several levels above you, or just throw some love to your boys. And it’s all good.

One recent example is this list written and curated by Jason Maxwell, published on his site, JMaxFitness.

[[Photo Credit: JMaxFitness.]]

[[Photo Credit: JMaxFitness.]]

Now, to be clear, I’m not picking on Jason here. I honestly believe that he’s one of the few who just wants to expose his readers to great people—but he’s certainly not complaining about the traffic I just sent him by posting that link.

More to the point, let’s examine the list. According to Jason, these are the “top” fitness pros he thinks you should follow in 2015. Because it’s totally subjective, there’s no real criteria that we can see, other than Maxwell’s assertion that these are “[s]cience and evidence based fitness professionals [who] have emerged with some of the best information and content on the internet.”

Notwithstanding the inherent difficulty of qualifying what constitutes the “best” content, the list doesn’t seem to follow its espoused directive, which—based on the supplied definition—would seem to be that all of the people on the list publish content that is “science and evidence based.” 

A noble premise…but ultimately untrue—a fact that becomes obvious from the very first item on the list.

Screen Shot 2015-01-07 at 3.22.00 PM

In the top spot, we have Dan John: a great trainer and helluva nice guy who’s built massive loyalty in the fitness industry by leveraging the one-two punch of being good at his job and reminding everyone of their favorite high school Phys. Ed. teacher2.

This is not to take anything away from Mr. John, who’s a wildly successful and highly effective coach. He is not, however, known for citing studies, scouring PubMed, or writing overly scientific articles; DJ is known for a no-nonsense, old-school approach that “just works.” 

None of that means Dan shouldn’t be number one on the list—it just means that the list should have been called “40 Fitness Professionals I Think Are Awesome” and the descriptor should have implied that all individuals on it were chosen for inclusion and ranked based on Maxwell’s level of respect, admiration, affection, or friendship with each of them. 

Don’t get me wrong, I appreciate being invited to the party: Jason said some pretty nice things about me, and even mentioned my screenwriting, which is sweet.

Screen Shot 2015-01-07 at 3.19.51 PM

Sick 15 pound curls, bro.

That said, you’ve gotta admit, I don’t exactly fit the implied mold. Sure, my stuff is backed by science, and I cite studies when I think it’s necessary, but for the most part I base my programming on experience over anything else.

I mean, let’s be honest: I’m a lot more likely to pen an article called “Top 5 Anal Sex Mistakes First Timers Make” than I am to write one called “5 Awesome Studies You Need to Read Because They’re Going to Give You New Ammo For Your Internet Arguments.” 

All of which is to say, whether they’re click bait or well-intended, subjective lists are basically bullshit, and we shouldn’t really give them much credence.

Objective Lists

Typically, lists of this kind are published by larger media outlets, and tend to be both broader and more thoroughly researched. Today’s Greatist piece is a good example.

These lists are objective because there is a pre-determined criteria for inclusion and ranking that’s set into place before names start being considered.

By and large, this is a better system: with regard to any assessment, objectivity is always more reliable than subjectivity. Meaning that, theoretically, the objective list on Greatist should be more informative in all ways than a list on a personal site.

However, there are problems with this model, as well.

Firstly, let’s just establish that larger sites like free traffic just as much—well, more—than bloggers. As such, the intention behind publishing any list can be called into question for a major media site just as easily as a single author blog. That particular wrinkle never changes. 

The issues I’m speaking of, however, come from the commitment to objectivity itself. Once a set of criteria is set into place, these sites have to stick to that criteria as closely as possible, or they sacrifice impartiality.

Objective lists can’t measure things like “best content” or “best trainer” because there’s simply no way to measure any of that; it’s all subjective. Instead, these lists measure one or more quantifiable characteristics, and those measurements need to be based on quantifiable variables and unadjusted metrics. Resultant of that, all truly objective lists are somewhat limited.

This brings us back to the Greatist list, for which it’s important to recognize that what’s being measured is influence. That’s it—just influence.

Before anyone passes judgement on the site for the ranking order, remember that Greatist makes no claims to be assessing the individuals included on the list in terms of skill, talent, knowledge, or ability. The list is solely a measure of influence.

Again, this is important because influence is measurable, based on some (objective) variables. Greatist actually has some really specific standards for those things, and the metrics are unquestionable.

But what are the metrics of influence? Stuff like Alexa ranking3, site traffic (measured in unique visits and page views), big media exposure, and social media stats (including Klout score4, total followers, and overall audience engagement).

Taken from the site itself: 

When trying to determine the most powerful innovators in this space, we looked at several factors for each candidate…we created a scoring system based on eight measurable categories: website page rank, social media presence, Klout score, number of studies or research published, number of products, professional degrees and certifications, and number of Google News mentions in 2014—all with variable levels of impact on the final score.

While I’m admittedly not privy to the specifics of how heavily each of those individual factors weighs into the equation, based on the order of the list, it’s pretty clear that overall “fame” has a pretty profound effect on things.

Screen Shot 2015-01-07 at 3.51.07 PM

[[Photo Credit: Greatist.]]

For example, Michelle Obama sits comfortably at the top of the list; as FLOTUS, she’s certainly the most famous person on it. Dr. Oz comes in at number two; despite all the controversy surrounding his advice, dude’s got his own TV show, and therefore a lot of influence. And so on.

Now, it would be nice if being famous, or having a lot of “influence” was a real measure of your worth as a fitness professional or health advocate. But influence isn’t necessarily correlated with any characteristic that translates into ability to help people. Some folks on this list have a lot of influence but are woefully unqualified to wield it, and might be doing more harm than good.

Further, influence should never be confused for overall impact—some people who are ranked highly might have a bunch of social media followers, but they’re not making a real difference in the industry.

After all, any list that ranks Instagram celebrity and professional narcissist Jen Selter above Arnold fucking Schwarzenegger is immediately suspect and should be taken with a gain of salt. To the credit of the article and those who wrote it, the folks at Greatist do point this out in their own way, saying of the Instagram queen, “Selter doesn’t have any exercise certifications yet often is found dishing outdated fitness advice, so go ahead and look, but don’t follow along.”

Acknowledgements of incompetence aside, it’s unavoidably off-putting when some know-nothing chick with a great ass is placed so highly above über-genius Eric Cressey or industry godfather Mike Boyle, owing solely to the fact that the aforementioned great ass attracts millions of IG followers who like oogling her and somehow feel that commenting on her social media accounts might one day lead to them banging her. (They may or may not be wrong. Fuck do I know?)

Given all of that, while I’m in favor of objectivity, these lists are ultimately useless when it comes to separating the wheat from the chaff. This wouldn’t be a problem if they were taken for what they were.

My fear—and the reason I wrote this—is that the average reader might look at any of these types of lists and assume that because one person was ranked higher than another, they’re “better.” This is a pretty slippery slope, and it’s both the most obvious and most insidious problem with creating and publishing any arbitrary ranking. 

To ameliorate this, these lists usually have some type of qualifier. While I don’t personally care about my own ranking, the Greatist staff gave me some props; probably not because they think I’m a swell guy, but because listing my accomplishments helps demonstrate credibility and drive home that I know what I’m talking about.

Screen Shot 2015-01-07 at 2.10.53 PM

Those deep brown eyes. That enigmatic smile. That perfectly manicured facial hair. Ohmygod it’s even got a watermark.

I mention this not to impress you, but to impress upon you that even a site publishing a list based on objective metrics relies on the subjective opinions of its editors to help guide the readers towards individuals of quality, and away from those who (like Selter) are in the public eye for reasons other than their ability to provide useful information. 

In an ideal world, this system works: the average bear develops some discerning taste, and follows coaches who can actually help them, and head in the right direction with their health and fitness goals. 

Closing Thinkz

As you can see, I don’t think much of these lists. I wouldn’t go so far say they’re totally useless, as they have the potential to expose readers to new experts; I just feel they’re apt to create as many headaches as they solve. 

If you’re asking me which I think is better, I’d have to say that as unreliable as they can be, subjective lists might have more value.

Despite not being based on anything quantifiable, it stands to reason that as long as the list is written by someone who’s earned your trust, there’s a good chance it’ll feature some other peeps you can trust, too. Then again, maybe you’re in the habit of trusting and following people just because they’re super attractive and they say fuck a lot, in which case you’re already in the right place. 

Snark aside, let’s be real: even if I’m not gonna jump for joy over someone anyone thinking I’m cool or influential and putting my mug on their site, I’m also not ignorant to the fact that inclusion on these lists can be leveraged. And  I certainly appreciate the links and traffic.

But I never lose sight of the fact that it is ultimately bullshit, and I think time would be better spent writing actual content. 

Then again, I just wrote a 2700-word article telling you why lists are stupid, so many next time I’ll just shut up and write some workouts or some shit. I dunno. 

In closing: if you’re a reader, don’t place too much value on these fitness lists as a qualifier for whether you should be listening to someone. Be smart and make your own decisions, and  

If you’re a fitness professional, try your best not to give a shit about these lists. They’re arbitrary as hell, and will never be a real reflection of the skill or professional value of those mentioned.

If you happen to be added to a list, appreciate it for what is, enjoy the social media juice, and leverage for social proof as best you can; just don’t let being mentioned blow your head up. More importantly, under no circumstances should you let not being included on one make you feel shitty.

Remember, it’s all just dick stroking, anyway. And you don’t need anyone else for that. Because. You know. Masturbation. 

Now. With all of that out of the way–I’d love to hear YOUR thoughts on this. So leave some insight to justify me obsessively checking my traffic and engagement stats for the next two days. 

Foot Notes

  1. This is your cue, people who feel compelled to post u mad! why u mad tho? or whatever memed nonsense you think passes as original humor.
  2. Worth mentioning here that Dan was, in point of fact, a high school PE teacher and coach for a good part of his career.
  3. The Alexa ranking of a site is a measure of its overall popularity, relative to all other sites globally and domestically. For example, Google is ranked number 1 both in the US and globally. RFS is ranked 31,437 in the US, meaning that there are only 31,436 sites standing between me and Google. I’m coming for you, suckas.
  4. Klout is a measure of social influence, ranked on a scale of 1-100; it’s calculated based on followers, mentions in media and on websites, articles published with your name on them, and a few other variables. Barack Obama has a Klout score of 99; mine is 81, which places me above many professional athletes and porn stars, and just below my buddy, TV star Matt McGorry.
About the Author

John Romaniello is a level 70 orc wizard who spends his days lifting heavy shit and his nights fighting crime. When not doing that, he serves as the Chief Bro King of the Roman Empire and Executive Editor here on RFS. You can read his articles here, and rants on Facebook.

Comments for This Entry

  • James Harris

    Always smooth and calm writing with a fuck ton of intro, retro, and heterospection. What? I mean, good article, John. I think I've read this twice now. Got me in the feels both times.

    December 29, 2016 at 7:18 pm

  • Adam Trainor

    "Given all of that, while I'm in favor of objectivity, these lists are ultimately useless when it comes to separating the wheat from the chaff." True story. Great post John. To the rising fitness star I'm sure these lists are all the rage until they realize who their bedfellows are. That said, links and mentions are hard to turn down, even for someone who is not at the bottom of the pile.

    March 3, 2015 at 1:42 pm

  • The Fit Fifties

    A great read. A hilarious read. And somewhat of an ironic read (for me, at least) considering the fact that I was directed towards this site by a "Best Health Blogs for 2015" list. As a quick side note, seeing Jillian Michael's photo at the top of this page nearly sent me into anaphylactic shock. Dear God (or Yahweh, Buddha, Allah, Baal, whomever), that lady drives me just fuckin' bat-shit crazy.

    January 22, 2015 at 4:05 pm

  • Nathan Lee Jordan

    I liked this post mainly because I agree they do not matter but also because I would like to someday be on a list like these. My blog does not get much traffic and overall I am an unknown in the fitness industry. Maybe I should make a list like you talked about my blog would probably get a thousand times more traffic than it currently does. I will keep getting better and keep learning from those who may be better than I am as well as those who are thought to be better than I am. Their are lots of people on that list of 40 fitness professionals to watch whose stuff I read on a regular basis usually on t-nation or the ptdc round up.

    January 20, 2015 at 2:38 pm

  • Adrienne Harvey

    It seems like they take a lot of the same names and just shuffle up the numbers every year...

    January 18, 2015 at 4:47 am

  • Diesel

    I actually came across the list from Greatist while searching for *influential* fitness experts. These lists are fantastic. Not because they are accurate or they are an answer for everything. But because they do the research for you. I run my own blog. It's nothing fancy but it's based on my own experience. It's value though? Zero. Because I'm still in the (re)launching phase, nothing I do is worth anyones time. Unless of course I score a guest post or a mention from a influential individual. I think this applies to everything else in the world. It doesn't matter how great or epic your product is, if you don't have any influence, nothing will happen. I might be a little off here, but I think it's the sad truth! Great post though, John!

    January 12, 2015 at 2:17 pm

  • Alexandra Williams

    I am a fitness pro and definitely have to explain that this list is based on social media influence, NOT skill or knowledge, even though some great trainers are here. But of course, many great trainers are NOT on the list. I only give credence to, and recommend lists done by other accredited fitness pros.

    January 11, 2015 at 11:14 pm

  • Athilates | Stuff to Check Out: New Years Edition - Athilates

    […] Thanks For Including Me On Your Stupid List – John Romaniello […]

    January 10, 2015 at 1:27 pm

  • Vibra Trainer Lloyd Shaw

    Thank-you for writing this, will share. Hopefully puts things in perspective for some people. In my niech industry unfortunately, the most influential where also the most dishonest.

    January 9, 2015 at 11:48 pm

  • Ron Swanson

    I would be humbled if I came behind Jen Selter. But then again, so is everyone BEHIND Jen Selter.

    January 9, 2015 at 2:47 am

  • Ben Hardy

    Didn't you write a list of female trainers to check out a few years ago? Is that still up on this new site? However you didn't 'rank' them - so I guess it was quite a bit different to creating a ranked list based on magic/metrics... *Edit - Did the guy from "Broscience" make the list?

    January 8, 2015 at 11:20 pm

  • Fact & Fitness

    Sooo about that buttsecks article.. I'm gonna need you to write that before I go that route..

    January 8, 2015 at 12:48 pm

  • Thanks for Including Me on Your Stupid List | Problem Solutions

    […] post Thanks for Including Me on Your Stupid List appeared first on Roman Fitness […]

    January 8, 2015 at 3:01 am

  • Derek Flanzraich

    I think you knew I'd love this, so thanks for writing it and being fair and awesome as usual. Greatist writes a lot of articles (some for traffic, some because they're important to write, and ideally both at the same time), but we ultimately think of our Most Influential list as a service piece. The real deal is that it takes us months to write and research, using up so many resources that it's debatable whether it's worth the traffic or not. We fight back and forth internally about how much editorial judgement we can use to move people we powerfully disagree with down the list (metrics always win, so then we fight about what metrics to include and how to weight them). Then we more or less happily take the flack for the majority of people who literally don't/won't read a single word about our intention or anybody's description before hating on it. We do all this because we believe an objective list of who really has influence (as you said, literally "just influence") is important for the space. It's important for us to see who really reached the most people in health last year. It's important for us to remember that Eric Cressey and Mike Boyle are amazing, but only the tiniest sliver of our country has a clue who they are. It's important for us to track that they dipped this past year from 2013 and consider why that is. I have some subjective thoughts on this, but since it's in almost every way a lot easier to be subjective than objective, I'll save them for elsewhere. :)

    January 8, 2015 at 2:29 am

  • Philip Kastinger

    As long as people get that it is about influence and that the actual position isn't a scientific rating on 'fitness industry skills' and of course has a purpose and intention beyond naming people, which has to take away objectivity, I think it is still interesting. Any information you put into the web can do harm, if people do not think. List, program, blog post - doesn't matter. It was interesting for me how broad their view on health and fitness was, to find some names on it I already follow and to discover some new. Next time I again explain my parents (or the thousand other people I know who don't care for fitness, progressive programming and Star Wars) what this coaching thing is I am doing, I can say: Look there is a list and he is on it, isn't that great? Will this do harm? Not to me, cause I follow your bourbon inspired ramblings with pleasure for other reasons. Those who care for fitness, have probably already an opinion regardless of this list. And for my friends, who do not care as mentioned, they won't be harmed by it either. Makes my life easier ;) if you approve of them or not ;)

    January 8, 2015 at 1:48 am

  • Mitch Calvert

    Great post. I'm now commenting here in a thinly veiled attempt to get some residual traffic to my blog. Thanks, bro!

    January 8, 2015 at 1:44 am

  • PJ Newton

    Yep, this is a great post... I browse them from year to year only to see if I had somehow missed an actual expert in the field... Turns out I never do. I do think that these list do more harm than good considering the general public EAT this shit up and will likely see someone (like the aforementioned, Selter) and go tell all their friends: "I was totally right, everything she says IS awesome!" and the world will be collectively worse off.

    January 8, 2015 at 1:11 am

Leave a Comment