USA Today's laughable picks for "best" of the year

USA Today sugarcoats a lot of the worst products of this past year, including DC's New 52, and Marvel's Now. I think these paragraphs stand out as some of the most truly awful in the article:

Best event:Avengers vs. X-Men. The battle between two superhero teams was as explosive you'd think it would be, but the event series excelled at boosting the profiles of Hope Summers and Scarlet Witch, having the Phoenix Force divided into five characters instead of one as one of its key plot twists, and turning Cyclops into the Marvel Universe's most-wanted villain. [...]

Honorable mention: Cyclops. The X-Men's leader has been on a mission to save mutantkind, no matter what, ever since he first appeared in the Marvel Universe, but the power of the Phoenix Force proved corruptible in AvX, sending him on a bad path that ultimately led to him murdering his mentor, Charles Xavier. Say it ain't so, Chuck!

No, you say it ain't so, wretched Gannett Co. newspaper! What makes the shaming of a decent fellow such a wonderful thing worth gushing over as badly as they are? I suppose the writer is one of the kind of people who thinks of Scott Summers as though he were a real person and that it's his fault for allegedly being dull and uninteresting instead of the writers who've been assigned to him. And that this perceived dullness justifies even remotely turning him bad. It's that kind of mindset that's made mainstream comics into a terrible experience, because all the publishers have done is make their product even more unreadable than ever before.

And this tragically is what gets the uncaring mainstream press to sit up and take notice, fawning over their horrid steps at all costs. If they don't care about the characters, why do they even bother to read the books at all?