Stepping up to my soapbox, I want to criticize a persistent trend in pseudo-journalism: the reporting, if it can really be considered as such, of petty and trivial content for the purpose of entertainment versus the dissemination of anything beneficial or educational.

Before launching my offensive, I acknowledge that many of my own articles published via the Odyssey Online are of the extremely light-hearted variety and I don't strictly adhere to the strongest journalistic principles. I have my standards. I do not attack. I do not report falsely. I do not project, at least not intentionally, an aura pretentiousness or insinuate that my thoughts are better than anyone else's thoughts. My intention here is to entertain and not harm others.

Caveat/disclaimer out of the way, I can no move on and illustrate a handful of articles via "The Richest," an entertainment site that publishes content primarily focused on celebrities and popular culture. Note, my introduction to "the Richest" was via a sponsored link on one of my social media accounts. What compelled me to open the link I don't know, but I obviously needed to learn about tank top loving celebs.

Not wishing to drag the preamble out any longer, here are some of the most petty articles I've found on the "The Richest."

"15 Celebs Who Love Wear Tank Tops, But Really Shouldn't"

Ignore the fact that people just want to be comfortable, something I address here, and hone in on the notion that people blantantly abuse the right to choose their own style. From Ariel Winter to Nic Cage to Jillian Michaels, this article's author describes the offending wearers as messes, entitled, and just "not that hot" even if they have a "banging body." They disregard a person's agency and proceed to shame celebrities in one way or another, all because they don't like the way someone looks in a tank top. Petty much? Judgmental much?

In fact, the author's entire history of article is plagued by topics that are petty and, quite frankly, trifling. Look, I understand you probably get some clicks, but you don't have to sound like such a tool while doing it.

"The 20 Hottest Female Athletes Of 2017"

Neither does the headline suggest the most talented, gifted, nor greatest, but the "hottest." From the same tank top shaming writer mentioned above comes a piece that briefly mentions athletic giftedness before offering repeated commentary on "amazing bodies" and "super hot women."

I get it. They're attractive women. They're also so much more than just that. They're accomplished athletes. Of course, there's more than one article via "The Richest" that lauds athletes for their aesthetics rather than their prowess in which whatever sport they engage.

"15 WWE Stars Completely Destroyed by Drugs"

Clicking on this headline I thought to myself that I finally found an article that might serve as a warning to stay away from drugs. It certainly is a warning against excessive drug use, but the article's author didn't explicitly share this. The information cited might be accurate, so I've nothing to complain about there.

What perturbs me is that rather than serve as a poignant reminder of the dangers of uninhibited drug use, this reeks of clickbait intent upon attracting through a schadenfreude mindset. I acknowledge that many are visual creatures, but the photos presented solidify my opinion.

"15 Stacked Babes Who Are (Or Who Claim To Be) Silicone-Free Zones"

Yeah, this really needed to be addressed. Seriously, I don't give a flying f--k. Whether she's stacked with silicone or not, how does that fact impact anyone else's life in any sort of way? Do their natural of artificially enhanced breasts upset some fundamental law of the universe and threaten to reign down fiery chaos upon us all? If she chooses you as a sexual partner, or you going to walk out on her mid-coitus because her boobs are "not real?"

My two favorite elements to this article? The first is that one celeb's chest is described as a "meal ticket." The other element I adore is that writer organized the women from smallest to largest. Convenient, right?! I hope my facetiousness is obvious.

"15 Hot Celebs Who Like 'Thick' Next To Their Partner"

Instead of dwelling on this one, I just ask you look at the headline and venture a guess as to what this writer decides discuss.

"15 Of the Biggest Red Carpet Fails These Celebs Want To Forget"

Maybe it's a by product of my clothes-free proclivities, but I'm not excited by fashion. Making fun of fashion blunders really isn't that fun, either, so this one strikes me as petty and trivial. The writer suggests that the celebs in question "want to forget" these blunders, but is that really true? Or are you just emphatically stating you think their fashion choices are not choices you like? Or are you just stirring the pot in order to increase traffic to the page. Maybe.

Doesn't really matter. Attract the site traffic however you see fit, I guess. But it doesn't change the fact that your topic and approach is immature and trivial.

"5 Hot AF Transgender Women Who Could Pick Up Any Straight Guy"

Link unprovided because I declined to click on it, but just observe the headline. These transgender women aren't just "hot," they're "Hot AF!"

"Topless Co-ed Takes Selfie, Rams into Police Car"

Something tells me that this story wouldn't have been reported on "The Richest" had the Co-ed been wearing her shirt. Again I declined to click on the like so I do not feel compelled to share the link.

In terms of quality, at least what I've thus far witnessed, "The Richest" seems in line with typical tabloid drivel. Earlier I mentioned my revulsion to articles not aligning to journalistic integrity or ideals, but I don't think most of the contributors are striving for that. "To each their own" is a mindset that is so very applicable, but looking through the vast majority of these articles, I can't help but to shake my head and say a prayer to Saint Perez Hilton, the patron saint of gossip mongering and petty, childish tabloid trash.

Ironically, I employ some of the same mechanisms to help lead people toward my submission for the article. Half-naked celebrity as a cover photo. Words to instigate. Even my hashtags are set to pull in a few casual observers.

However, my articles all are intent upon provoking the development of insights, whether those the reader's own or of my own design. So, what do you think? Am I just being a curmudgeon? Or do you agree? God bless the First Amendment, am I right?