A lot of buzz around this issue today … Barrett got us blogging when he sent this tweet:
Per Wiki, the serial comma (also known as the Oxford comma and the Harvard comma) is the comma used immediately before a grammatical conjunction (usually and, or, and sometimes nor) preceding the final item in a list of three or more items. More simply, as per AskOxford.com, the ‘Oxford comma’ is an optional comma before the word ‘and’ at the end of a list.
For example, this three-media list can be punctuated as either “Linkedin, Facebook, and Twitter” (with the serial comma) or as “Linkedin, Facebook and Twitter” (without the serial comma).
There is no consensus among writers and editors on the usage or avoidance of the serial comma. Most American English authorities recommend its use, but it seems to be less frequent in British English. In many languages (e.g., French, German, Italian, Polish, Spanish) the serial comma is not the norm; it may even be explicitly forbidden by punctuation rules – but it may be allowed or even recommended in some cases to avoid ambiguity or to aid understanding when reading.
Wikipedia actually has an excellent section on this topic. Take a look:
Contents
1 Arguments for and against
2 Ambiguity
3 Usage
4 References & External links
We have relaxed our own position on the use of the serial comma. Before text limits of 140 characters or thereabouts, we would insist, but now, we say lose any extra character you can while preserving meaning.
There are many views on this little mark. Click here to read one solution. What’s your view?
Comma Clout 
I am definitely in favor of the serial comma, and I am very happy that Newsweek has chosen to start using it.
While I subscribe to the theory that the English language and its grammar is constantly evolving, I think some things should be sacred like periods, quotation marks, and serial commas. Enough said.
I was taught, many years ago, that the serial comma should always be used when clarity is an issue. For example: For lunch, we had salad, lobster and ice cream vs. We had salad, lobster, and ice cream. The lack of a comma always distracts me from what I’m reading: I’m can’t avoid imaging what the combination of lobster and ice cream would taste like. Maybe it depends on the flavor of the ice cream.
The Chicago Manual of Style prefers the serial comma, but is satisfied if the writer is at least consistent throughout the manuscript. It saves editors and proofreaders going through possibly hundreds of pages searching for and correcting what may or may not be errors.
I am in agreement with Becky, shereese, and sunnycee. 🙂
I like to keep things to a minimum. I use serial commas when the list is complicated (We need more forks and knives, tables and chairs, and tablecloths.) but not when it’s simple (We need more eggs, bacon and ham.). But that is only with “and.” I tend to use it with or and nor, no question.
“We had salad, lobster, and ice cream.” makes “and” redundant. What you’re actually stating is “We had salad, lobster, ice cream.”
IMO it’s an issue of literacy & general intelligence if the reader cannot understand context.
Reblogged this on Leslie's Blog.