SLAM! Wrestling Editorial: Blind loyalty hides the dark side
By JOHN F. MOLINARO -- SLAM! Wrestling
Over the past four years, pro wrestling has enjoyed a boom in its
business in North America. Record buyrates, huge Monday night
ratings and sellouts at major arenas have become the norm, especially
for the WWF. Nobody can deny that wrestling is hot.
Just don't ever make the mistake of thinking it's an ethical business.
It isn't. And don't think the people running it are principled.
They're not.
Since joining SLAM! Wrestling last year, I've written several articles
criticizing the business and those who are in charge. As a result, I've
been flooded with hundreds of e-mails from irate fans, promoters and
wrestlers: "For someone who professes to love pro
wrestling, you sure say a lot of negative things about it", "You seem
intent on bringing the wrestling business down" and
"Why are you always so negative?"
Wrestling fans, God love 'em, are among the most blindly loyal fans in
all of sports. They've joined hand in hand with wrestling management in
chastising members of the media who dare to question the moral and
ethical infrastructure of pro wrestling.
Wrestlers and promoters have told me that I "simply don't understand
the wrestling business." It's a similar charge levied at
any reporter or member of the media who writes something critical about
pro wrestling. A charge I've heard all too often.
Phil Mushnick knows what I'm talking about. Mushnick is the New York
Post columnist whose columns on the WWF-steroid
scandal in the early '90s lead to the U.S. government handing down an
indictment against Vince McMahon. Mushnick is the one who acts as a wrestling
watchdog, pointing out gross racial stereotypes, obscene acts of
violence and sexually degrading scenes on RAW is WAR and Nitro. He's
the one who speaks out against the practices of promoters like
McMahon, WCW's Eric Bischoff and ECW's Paul Heyman.
And he's the one who's been called everything from a coward to a liar by
the wrestling establishment and fans. He just doesn't understand the
wrestling business, they say.
Yet, despite his sanctimonious and holier-than-thou tone, Mushnick has
made some of the most poignant, dead-on accurate observations about the
wrestling business found in print journalism.
After Brian Pillman's death in 1997, Mushnick wrote "The problem is
mainstream media don't look hard enough at pro wrestling. Imagine if
middle-aged pro-baseball players dropped dead on a regular basis, this
would be page one stuff and a federal inquiry would be launched."
Pillman's was just another in a long line of drug-related deaths in
wrestling that was ignored.
The drug problem in this sport is very real. It's very ugly.
Yet, promoters turn a blind eye to it, offering the feeble argument
that what wrestlers do on their own time is their own business.
Promoters have washed their hands of the drug issue. They don't want to
have anything to do with truth. The sport, is after all, a con.
Promoters extend that con to real life issues within pro wrestling.
They don't deal in truth. They deal in fabrications and lies.
Wrestlers, as Bret Hart so astutely pointed out, are nothing more than
circus animals. They're forced to jump through hoops and once they've
lived out their usefulness, promoters take them out back behind the barn
and put a slug into them.
This is a reality that I, as a reporter on the inside covering the
sport, have come to understand. It's also a reality not lost on a
wrestling 'outsider' like Mushnick.
Following the death of Bobby Duncum Jr. last year, he wrote, "Pro
wrestling's hot. Red hot. The wrestlers, while real human
beings, are expendable and interchangeable. Their real-life deaths mean
nothing."
A more concise description of the state of pro wrestling, I don't think
I've ever read. In one simple paragraph, Mushnick brilliantly captured
what pro wrestling has become: a macabre body count of dead bodies.
Phil Mushnick understands.
Think I'm being over dramatic? Think it isn't true? Think I'm making a
big deal over nothing? Think that wrestlers aren't anything more than
pieces of meat?
Think about this. Earlier this year, ESPN's Jim Rome had Vince McMahon
on his "Last Word" program. The interview at one point centred on the
Owen Hart tragedy. When Rome questioned McMahon on his decision to
continue the pay-per-view, McMahon defended is actions saying that Owen
Hart would have wanted it that way.
Just last month, Rome had Bret Hart on his program and after replaying
Vince's comments, Rome told the viewing audience
that McMahon's comments were the most cold-blooded, arrogant and
insensitive thing he had ever heard.
After hearing that Bret's salary had been cut in half after injuring
himself in a WCW ring while working for the company,
Rome correctly pointed out that wrestlers are at the mercy of promoters,
that they need some kind of union and that
they're continually being asked by management to perform stunts they are
not qualified to do.
Jim Rome understands.
Three weeks ago, Jim Cornette was on Dave Meltzer's 'Wrestling Observer'
Internet show where he was labelling Vince Russo and WCW a bunch of
corrupt, immoral cowards. Conveniently, he had no similar condemnation
for his former employer McMahon or the WWF.
I phoned the program to question Cornette on this. I cited the Owen Hart
debacle as a prime example of the WWF being just as unethical as WCW.
He labelled my comments 'distasteful' and said I simply don't understand
the wrestling business.
Here's what I understand about that evening in Kansas City:
Owen Hart plummeted 75 feet to his death on a WWF pay-per-view. The WWF
sent EMT's down to ringside to pry Owen's body off the canvas and carted him to the back. The WWF
continued on with the pay-per-view. They did not
inform the live audience so as not to spoil the desired crowd responses
they wanted for the rest of the show. McMahon later
told Michael Landsberg on TSN's 'Off The Record' that the thought of stopping
the show never even entered into his mind. He then decided to speak for
Owen on Jim Rome's program, saying Owen would have wanted the show to
continue.
Cold-blooded. Heartless. Calculated. Insensitive. Obscene. That's the only way the actions of McMahon and the WWF on
that night can be described. That's what's truly distasteful.
That's what I understand.
Did the WWF kill Owen Hart? Of course not. Was it an accident?
Absolutely. Do they regret what happened? Yes.
But, the death of Owen Hart, the alarming death rate among pro
wrestlers, the drug problem that plagues wrestling, the way wrestlers
are either fired or have their pay cut when they get injured --
it's on all the hands of Vince McMahon, Eric Bischoff and Paul Heyman.
This is on their conscience.
Wrestling is not an unsoiled business. It's a dirty one. No amount of
whitewash will ever sanitize it. No matter how much
polish and shine people put on the corporate image of the WWF and WCW,
the strong stench of corruption emanating from
Stamford and Atlanta will never subside. It isn't surprising to see
promoters and owners pass themselves as great humanitarians.
But the fact that fans would even foster the pretence that wrestling and
its promoters have an ounce of integrity is downright laughable.
The reality, as I see it, isn't that we, the media, don't understand the
wrestling business... it's that we understand it all too well.
Reader Feedback
July 6:What's next for WWF & ECW?
You know, there's one thin I can't get out of my mind, with all the talk
and anticipation for the acquisition of WWF RAW by CBS for broadcast on TNN.
If CBS likes WWF so much, why will RAW be on TNN? According to all the
numbers, the ECW show had average ratings of only 0.85 or so, and yet was
STILL the highest rated show on the network. Do they really expect TNN is
CAPABLE of getting a show whose ratings are at least 4.0? And as for having HEAT on MTV... I just don't get it.
More specifically, why isn't RAW on network television? IS there some rule
on CBS that they can't show wrestling on the main network, the way that NBC
used to have WWF's old Saturday Night Main Event?
From what I understand, what WWF gets from the deal is a new
drama series (which WILL be broadcast on the network no doubt),
a network for XFL football, and an extra bunch of promotional
appearances at CBS-affiliated locations.
Sorry, but how this appears to me is that the ones who deserve the
credit for enabling McMahon to be at this point, his wrestlers, will
be all but ignored, while the untried and untested get all the glory,
attention and guaranteed salaries. And here I thought you don't
drop the one that brought you to the dance.
David Scott
Good article on the WWF/ECW/TNN/USA issue, however there's one issue
you didn't cover (it didn't really fit in though), but is an issue which
has bothered me. I haven't been kept totally in-the-know on everything
about it, but how do you think WWF on TNN will effect the WWF's programming
content? From what I understand, ECW has faced some problems with "the
network" over content on their shows. I'm not sure if this is an angle, or
if there is some reality behind it, and also, exactly what content they had
problems with. The WWF has been known to have some problematic angles, and
i'm wondering whether the WWF's success will be so huge that TNN/CBS/MTV
won't care.
Just as a side issue, do you think that this move will effect ratings
at all?
Thank you for your time Chris, and I hope to hear from you. Keep up
the good work.
Steven R. Evenden
aka. Psycho Steve
Hello, I read your latest column, "What's next for WWF and ECW" and I
agree, it will be very interesting to see what happens. I think ECW will
be the biggest loser in all of this. It's too bad, because their ECW on
TNN show is picking up.
I noticed that a lot of people send you email about current storylines, and
angles they think should be dropped. I'm going to list a few predictions
instead.
1) Jeff Jarrett becomes a face very soon. The New Blood will soon declare
Goldberg the chosen one and turn on Jarrett. This one is pretty obvious.
If Jarrett loses at the Bash it could happen right away, setting up a
Goldberg/Jarrett feud in the next few weeks delaying the super feud that
will go down between Scott Steiner and Goldberg. From a business
perspective it also makes sense. Jarrett's merchandise is doing well even
though he's a heel. He's got the slapnutz catch phrase that the fans like
and he hasn't been a face in a long time. I say it'll work.
2) Gorgeous George is thrown into the ECW vs TNN storyline. I predicted
this would happen when she first appeared on ECW on TNN. What happened
this past show demonstrates that it will almost surely happen. Gorgeous
George can be to ECW what Sable was to WWF.
3) WCW's ratings will go up when wwf WWF to TNN (obviously), and their
shows will improve. Russo will be gone from WCW before the end of the year
and possibly rejoin the WWF. WCW will need to go through a reshuffling yet
again and their shows will become stale. If they survive this and get
their act together and hire the right people then they will be the top pro
wrestling company in 2-3 years.
Those are my predictions, what do you think of them?
Harry
