Outsider's View of AC After Fox News/Ham Sandwich Fiasco

Having just joined Associated Content earlier this week, and excited to be able to start writing for someone other than my professors, I thought the people already a part of AC might be curious how the incident with Fox News and the ham sandwich looked to an outsider, albeit it one that is still only studying journalism.

I first heard that Fox News had reported a satire as fact from one of my professors who briefly mentioned it. Truthfully, I was more interested in the story of the hate crime than Fox botching the report.

As I investigated the matter via Google searches, and read several articles and blogs, I noticed that a lot had gone wrong. The story was obviously a satire, so why didn't Fox notice, or at least find the original report to confirm? And being an obvious satire, why did the writer try to pass it off as legitimate news? It's a shame the fallout that occurred, because even though the school involved was pretty over-the-top in going to the level they did regarding the "hate crime," they didn't deserve national attention and angry calls. I don't know who's to blame, and fortunately that's not really my call, anyway.

One thing I am curious about is who let Fox off the hook? Other than people leaving comments on blogs, I haven't seen too many people blaming Fox, which is odd considering their standing in the news world (although, from what I've been seeing, it wasn't as high as I thought to begin with). I had always assumed that when I become a journalist I will be the one who gets crucified for printing something that's not true (but that's not to say I don't intend to kick my source where it counts after I find out it's false).

But in the end, the parody article was actually what turned me on to this site in the first place. As news it was clearly out of place, but as a satire, it was really funny. And not only that, it was exactly what I enjoy writing about, which is great since I never get that opportunity in college (apparently "fake news" isn't a top priority with English and Journalism professors; maybe they're just old).

I'm stoked about the opportunity to write and get my stuff out there, and I'm especially looking forward to finally getting some feedback from the general writing public.

So I guess, having not heard of AC before this ham fiasco, for me, at least, it had a positive outcome. That's not to say, of course, that I don't think it was a big deal. Maybe it's the journalist in me that makes me do so, but I always want every side of the story. After reading a bunch of different articles and blogs, personally I was able to understand that mistakes were made, but then again, I wasn't one of the people in Maine or on the staff at AC who had to suffer the repercussions; me saying I know how that felt would be like a man claiming he understands what a pregnant woman is going through.

I don't think AC's image will be hurt, not only because of all the new writers they are going to rake in, but also because now that something like this happened, I think it'll be something everyone is going to be on the lookout for in the future, and everyone else realizes that. Just like airport security was beefed up after 9/11, now it'll be impossible for a humor story to slip through the cracks.

So that's just one (used-to-be) outsider's opinion, but I think that, at least for those who bothered to read more than one blog that mistook AC for the AP, people are going to forget about it (stuff happens), especially the ones like me who think it's too good to be true that there's a sight like AC out there in the first place.

In the meantime, I'm going to start working on some fake news of my own, so be sure to check back every day! (Or however long it takes for a story to get printed on AC)