Edit: My co-writer for the piece linked wrote this comprehensive rebuttal to all of the points mentioned in the VICE article linked below.
Earlier today I was linked to this article, which basically calls everything I wrote in the article titled 5 Depressing Realities Behind Popular Reality TV Shows into question. The author of the linked article, in a post that I can only describe as a the most desperate attempt to prove someone wrong since Hitler wrote a strongly worded letter to the Vienna Academy of Art with Nazi stationary, pretty much accused the article I helped write, and by extension all of Cracked of being full of shit.
For anyone who is curious, this claim has less basis in fact than the author of that VICE pieces ability to fly. Cracked.com has rules about sourcing in place that are so strict drinking while reading them automatically gives you a DUI. If any writer, whether they’re a first time pitcher or a long-time columnist tries to deliberately misrepresent facts, they’re gone. End of story. If an article is found to have shaky sources it’s sent back to the workshop and the writer is banned from doing anything else until said sources are fixed, how do I know you ask? Well …
That’s Cracked senior editor, David Wong raking me over the coals for shitty sources in what became this article. I was literally banned from doing anything else Cracked related until I fixed every single source, until I backed up every thing claimed with a rock solid quote from a reputable source. At the time of that indiscretion on my part I had 20 articles under my belt. Wong thought nothing of slapping down my shit and I don’t blame him, one bad article calls into question everything Cracked has done. Which is why VICE’s article was particularly insulting.
It didn’t just insult me and my co-writer, it insulted the dozens of people who helped get that article to the front page, the people who’ve spent years making Cracked the foremost source of fact based humour on the entire internet.
In the article linked above, Mohammed Shariff (my co-writer) and I researched the living fuck out of every example linked, as is the Cracked way. VICE seemed to take exception to every single one, so I decided to explain why they can go fuck themselves.
VICE, or more specifically, their writer “Jamie Lee Curtis Taete” took exception to the claim that “No One from The Biggest Loser Can Keep the Weight Off” because according to him “About one-fourth” of contestants weren’t able to keep the weight they’d lost off. Which means that the Cracked.com claim of “Almost everyone” wasn’t true.
Which is where I point out that virtually every person from the show put on at least 20 pounds after it ended, in other words the difference between being healthy and being overweight. Then I should point out that the actual article I wrote says, right there in it “almost every Biggest Loser winner has gained back a chunk of the weight he or she lost on the show“. Not all of the weight, or even half of it, but a significant, noticeable chunk of it. Like you know, for example 20 fucking pounds. That may be a drop in the bucket for some of the people featured on the show, but 20 freaking pounds is a pretty noticeable difference. So the first example that VICE found fault with is actually perfectly acceptable (if you read it properly), because everything claimed in the article is 100% fucking true! Virtually no fucker can keep the weight off, as evidenced by the fact that virtually everyone involved with the show has put some of the weight back on and that only like 3 people involved lost any more weight after it ended. Even the really fucking fat ones who probably needed to do just that.
But hey, VICE had 5 points to pick apart, surely their other points held water. Is a sentence that is so wrong typing it out technically counted as incest. Basically the entire article hinges on the fact that Cracked.com (a comedy website) used hyperbole to describe certain examples, thus everything it has ever published is completely baseless.
Cracked.com is a comedy website, sure, but it’s also one of the most disciplined and demanding places to write for. Simply because the standard and quality of the content they put out is only matched by the standards they demand of the sources included in said content.
So for everyone who read that VICE article and wondered if Cracked really is full of shit, whether they’ll happily publish any old rubbish to get views. Please, go pitch there yourself and try it. See how far you get.
I can safely say that Cracked.com is one of the most, if not the most reputable sources of information on the entire internet. But like I said, if you don’t believe me, go pitch there and see for yourself how difficult it is to get something published. I’ll wait.