Far be it from me to question Lake Superior State University as a safeguard of integrity for the academy, but eliminating "LOL," "bling" and "metrosexual" from the English language would effectively leave me vocally bored.  Words themselves are not cliche; usages are.  I think this annual publication attempts to appear starkly observant based on cheeky, literal oxymorons that have or nothing to do with the relevance of the name to the thing itself.  For example, the list suggest that "sanitary landfill" fall out of favor, supporting said suggestion with the anecdote "'Ever been to one?' asks Stan Slade of Long Beach, Mississippi. 'Not the cleanest place in the world. What happened to the county or city dump?'"  Clever Stan.  You're clever. 

This fails to reconcile the importance of linguistic specificity.  Analogy, metaphor and multiple words used to describe the same object or idea only serve to provide clarity, not fodder for smart-alecky "scholars" of whom I tire, by and by.