• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Skepticism and Cracked.com

joobz

Tergiversator
joobz
Joined
Aug 31, 2006
Messages
17,998
Cracked.com is a website dedicated to snarky humor poking fun at everything. While there are a bunch of contributors to the site, I have noticed that there are periodically some very healthy skeptical articles published.

For instance:
the-6-most-misguided-causes-ever-made-famous-by-celebrities

which features Jenny McCarthy in the number one spot.


I was wondering if anyone else noticed a skeptical bend to Cracked.com articles. Is this skepticism a byproduct of the wide contributor-ship or is it selected for by the editors?
 
joobz said:
Cracked.com is a website dedicated to snarky humor poking fun at everything. While there are a bunch of contributors to the site, I have noticed that there are periodically some very healthy skeptical articles published.

For instance:
the-6-most-misguided-causes-ever-made-famous-by-celebrities

which features Jenny McCarthy in the number one spot.


I was wondering if anyone else noticed a skeptical bend to Cracked.com articles. Is this skepticism a byproduct of the wide contributor-ship or is it selected for by the editors?
Click to expand...

Well, they got the McCarthy thing right, but the Peltier section was pretty weak.
 
Last edited:
Very good writing, and sometimes a healthy dose of skepticism, but sometimes they seem to announce things that deserve a more skeptical look. But no source perfect and they have a pretty good record.
 
joobz said:
Cracked.com is a website dedicated to snarky humor poking fun at everything. While there are a bunch of contributors to the site, I have noticed that there are periodically some very healthy skeptical articles published.
Click to expand...


The fact that David Wong, the editor of Cracked, is a JREF forum member (and has been for close to 4 years now) might have some connection with that.

Edited to add: click the "About Me" tab at that link.
 
Last edited:
They also just went nuts on Nobel Prize-winners who went on to espouse crazy pseudo-science.
 
Nova Land said:
The fact that David Wong, the editor of Cracked, is a JREF forum member (and has been for close to 4 years now) might have some connection with that.

Edited to add: click the "About Me" tab at that link.
Click to expand...

I think David Wong is AN editor, not THE editor.

It's good to have healthy skepticism, even on a humor site.
 
I keep up with their articles on a daily basis. They have many different writers, and guest writers, but they have a consistent satirical style that is insanely hilarious (I guess that's where they got their name from). The skeptical side could have a lot to do with the editors but they also encourage their readers to submit articles for them. I have noticed their skeptical leanings as well. Although it doesn't surprise me that they would have JREF members in their entourage.
 
Cracked.com is one of my favourite websites (In particular Seanbaby's articles, they're hilarious) although some of the things certain editors write are dubious, but it's usually in the form of "Hey there's this new thing and it might be cool".
 
SeanBaby's comic hacks have nearly killed me several times.

They also posted one of the greatest rebuttals to the Roger Ebert "games are not art" fracas, though I can't remember which editor penned that one.

Swaim's videos are pretty hysterical. Their "LOST 1920's Radio Drama" was absolutely brilliant. A lot of talented minds over there.
 
Forget Cracked, I love John Dies at the End. OK, don't forget Cracked either.
 
David Wong's the editor?

How super cool!!!

Great Job there David!
 
You know what I find interesting about the 6 causes listed - they are all plausible only when you cannot trust official government sources of information. The first three I honestly don't know about. The little I know about the specific cases mentioned is not in conflict with what he says, but do indicate cause for concern regarding the validity of convictions. Couple that with little faith in how well our current judicial system works, and I find the possibility of innocence for any random convict to be higher than I am comfortable with.
 
You kids will not remember when Cracked was still on the newsstand shelves. You probably don't recall news stands, that sold the latest pulp crap to yo. At the time, Cracked was what you bought when Mad was sold out: similar, but second-rate, "humor" for retards who missed the boat.

Cast your thoughts into the Internet Age. Suddenly Mad is second-rate crap, and Cracked is some first-class satire.

Truly, the Internet giveth and the Internet taketh away. Or something that describes the problems inherent in resting in ones heralds. Either way I make a profit from you rubes.
 
I remember d^.^b

dropzone said:
You kids will not remember when Cracked was still on the newsstand shelves. You probably don't recall news stands, that sold the latest pulp crap to yo. At the time, Cracked was what you bought when Mad was sold out: similar, but second-rate, "humor" for retards who missed the boat.

Cast your thoughts into the Internet Age. Suddenly Mad is second-rate crap, and Cracked is some first-class satire.

Truly, the Internet giveth and the Internet taketh away. Or something that describes the problems inherent in resting in ones heralds. Either way I make a profit from you rubes.
Click to expand...

I'm only 31 and I still have my collection of Mad and Cracked magazines. The Cracked website still has that "make fun of everybody even/especially if you like them" attitude. I definitely like their internet articles more than I liked their magazine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom