Is WWE Hitting Puberty?

Why am I blogging about wrestling two posts in a row; especially WWE’s brand of wrestling (sports entertainment)? I haven’t watched WWE seriously in a very long time but the latest storyline, involving wrestler CM Punk spilling the beans about the real-life, backstage drama of the WWE, are shaking things up. On this Monday’s Raw CM Punk gave away their new media strategy, their thesis statement by saying, “I’m making wrestling relevant.”

Wrestling hasn’t been relevant in a very long time. Its arguable professional wrestling hasn’t been relevant since people discovered it’s a hoax; maybe it was the Hulk Hogan/Vince McMahon steroid trial in the early ‘90s – who really knows? I know I haven’t looked at wrestling as real ever (my father shattered that illusion immediately and I am thankful for that one) but there’s something about professional wrestling that’s fascinating. In my previous post about TNA’s Destination X I discuss how Barry Blaustein’s documentary Beyond the Mat really puts wrestling into perspective when it states, “professional wrestling is theater at its most base.”

Is CM Punk’s, and ultimately Vince McMahon’s, latest stratagem going to legitimize professional wrestling? Of course not. Even watching Raw right now I don’t see it gaining any legitimacy; it still contains the contrived scripted storylines featuring John Cena and others. However, the product isn’t going to change overnight and it’ll take time for the product to grow – just like its audience. For the last few years, and especially during Linda McMahon’s failed Senate campaign last year, WWE has been shying away from its Attitude era, where the blood spilled regularly and there were scantily clad women everywhere. The product has been rated TV-PG for quite a while now. Why?

Although I can’t confirm this I’m certain it has something to do with rebranding. Wrestling’s ratings, especially WWE’s, plummeted in the early 2000s. The big names of the 1990s – Stone Cold Steve Austin, The Rock, Mick Foley, and so forth – have left the business, leaving it in the hands of a new group of entertainers. Other promising wrestlers (Eddie Guerrero, Chris Benoit, Rob Van Dam, Chris Jericho, and Kurt Angle) either died, retired, or went to other promotions. That left them with in-house talent, talent necessitating building. People like John Cena didn’t just pop out of the back selling shirts, action figures, and other paraphernalia; they needed to become mainstays of cable television through product awareness, exposure, and the such. Building a brand doesn’t happen instantly and WWE was losing its long-term viewers who were growing up, beginning families, and outgrowing wrestling. Where does that leave McMahon’s empire?

It leaves it in a stagnant position where profits decline. What does one do in this situation? They could either go for more shock value tactics or recreate the product – beginning with children. Impressionable children looking for role models respond to John Cena, Rey Mysterio, and other larger than life personalities. My girlfriend used to take school pictures and always saw wrestling shirts for either John Cena or Rey Mysterio; sometimes she’d ask the children which wrestler they liked most so they’d smile on camera. Well, those kids are entering middle school and high school and the childish, cut and paste storylines (where good is good and bad is bad) that permeated the wrestling world for so many years don’t cut it anymore.

In essence, the fans WWE has cultivated over the last few years have hit puberty and WWE wants to tag along for the ride. These kids have discovered masturbation and WWE wants to provide them material.

Of course puberty, for young men, is rife is testosterone and the brutality associated with wrestling will fill that void wonderfully – as long as it grows with the audience. However, I wouldn’t be surprised if wrestling begins featuring even more adolescent geared sexuality in the upcoming years. Imagine what would happen if WWE garnered the fandom of millions of teenagers growing pubic hair for the first time and kept them devoted for the next 15 years or so. It would mean dump trucks full of money for the McMahon family, a higher wage for the wrestlers, and large sums of money for their parent networks. It worked before with the Attitude era, which attracted the men who watched early Shawn Michaels, Hulk Hogan, and other such performers, so why won’t it work this time?

I can’t verify if it’ll work (aside from a lack of prophetic abilities) but it’ll take more than one pissed off wrestler. Honestly, there’s a part of me that’s convinced it’s too little too late. After all, the internet has been a source of behind the scenes wrestling data for well over a decade and the WWE has tried to quell these various reports by dismissing them and ignoring them. Over the last year or two (and even going back to the mid 2000s with the interactive pay-per-view Taboo Tuesday) the WWE has been using social media to reach its fans and has been implementing the latest technologies in data mining and acquiring marketing information from willing participants to determine the stronger aspects of its product. Fans can now like wrestlers on Facebook, letting the WWE know in a bastardized democratic way who fills seats and who doesn’t. I wouldn’t be surprised if WWE had a bunch of focus groups over the last year or two.

Maybe it’s too late; maybe they missed their window and their position’s been usurped by Mixed Martial Arts and the UFC, Youtube, and the countless other distractions out there. We’re a culture exposed to reality television for a long time now and maybe it’s become part of our media expectations. Wrestling is a con from the very beginning and it’s possible this doesn’t sit well with the upcoming generation. It’s possible it could’ve worked if they embraced the internet’s democratic leanings a long time ago but now I’m not so certain. It’s also possible the media paradigm shift we’re currently living through is changing the product’s viewership and nothing will change the tides. Maybe it’s a culmination of all this. All I can say for certain is that WWE’s ratings and attendance have declined over the last decade and it’s uncertain whether their brand building project over the last few years will surrender future profits.

While over ¾ of WWE’s product this Monday night has been as lackluster as what I’ve seen sporadically over the last few years I am curious where it’s headed. In that respect it’s worked a little – it peaked my interest. I doubt I’ll labor through Raw each week but I’m interested where the product is headed over the new few months and years. What’ll it be like when its adolescent fan base starts driving; what about when they’re in college; what about when they get married and await their first child? Honestly, who knows if professional wrestling will last that long? After all, it’s an outdated form of entertainment trying to survive in a new media environment where content is flowing at unprecedented levels. Does television even have the power to withstand the next few decades of technological leaps?

In the meantime, we’ll have to see what happens with CM Punk, the next week or two of matches, and wonder whether wrestling is about to hit puberty with its tween and teenage viewers. This whole scheme, where wrestlers begin integrating more aspects of their real lives and the drama making internet trolls notorious into their characters may work, will take time to play out and maybe the fruit of their labors will take years to ripen. Maybe CM Punk will become the next big thing in professional wrestling. Only time will tell.

4 responses to “Is WWE Hitting Puberty?

  1. I’m pretty sketchy on this whole thing. Despite finding it incredibly interesting. I haven’t seen any of it, but I’ve followed it online since Punk’s initial revelatory speech. Is Punks stance completely legit? It seems so to me. Which is obviously a great thing. It’s a great thing that he’s trying to make Cena and McMahon aware of the fact that they’re products, and they’re not what the fans actually want, despite them still turning up in their droves.

    It’s the same with The Rock. I watched a video on his blog today of him tearing Cena to pieces after hearing about a speech he made during the Australian leg of the tour. Again, it’s as if Cena genuinely believes the things he’s saying. I find the Rock/Cena thing weirder than with Punk. Because essentially we have two ‘face’ characters here, that don’t seem to be acting entirely in character. There seems to be genuine animosity. But inevitably when two ‘faces’ face off, one will always become the heel. And that will always be Cena. Nobody that knows anything about the history of the company would side with Cena over The Rock. Shit, he’s the most electrifying man in sports entertainment.

    But with The Rock and Cena set to lock horns over their seemingly legitimate beef – it still doesn’t matter who the fans want, or who’s the better wrestler. Because that’s what Punk is trying to show. That everything is booked and choreographed. You can’t judge who is better based on a win record, because wrestlers are paid to play, and paid to lose.

    It all has me wondering. How real can it really be? Has it come out that it either is, or isn’t 100% authentic? I haven’t watched it so I don’t know. But I do hope that Punk and The Rock actually hate Cena. If they hate him half as much as I do then he’ll be dead before long.

    • Let me begin by stating the following: I loathe John Cena.

      I can’t deny his position in professional wrestling nor his role as top dog in WWE for years on end (selling shirts, licensing, video games, etc.) but that doesn’t make him good. I hadn’t watched WWE for a long time (and only sporadically over the last few years) but I can’t deny that this new angle is interesting. But, like I said in the article, it might be too little too late. Incorporating the internet buzz into their characters might not go over with aplomb; then again, I could be horribly wrong and it could revitalize wrestling for the next decade or so.

      I’ll admit that I like The Rock but I’m not really interested in seeing him wrestling Cena next year. Maybe it’ll be a good match but I just don’t care for either. I’m fully convinced the Punk angle is just that – an angle. Punk probably went to Vince with an idea (or Vince went to Punk and gave him the ball) and it’s worked so far. If Punk wins the belt on Sunday I’m curious to see where the product is going. I’m not the biggest CM Punk fan but I can’t deny he’s charismatic and a mediocre performer. It’s too bad Chris Benoit died…

      • Yeah I’ve never been a huge Punk fan, I just love this whole deal. It would be a huge slap in the face if it transpired that it was all Vince’s doing. That’s some crazy paradox he’d be pushing. Sacrificing his own popularity via CM Punk for the sake of the company. Taking all the flack for years worth of business. Only for the entire scenario to be yet another piece of business to promote his business.

        I’m not excited by the Rock/Cena match either. Christ, every Wrestlemania match these days is a single fall, exhibition match. It couldn’t be more boring. I watched a live stream of the last Wrestlemania. It was supremely dull. Even with Rock hosting. There’s no way I’d pay Sky £15 to legitimately watch that thing.

  2. It’s only 15 pounds on Sky? Fucking hell! Those things are like $50 (25 pounds) here and even more if you want it in HD. I haven’t bought a WWE pay-per-view in years (probably since the second ECW One Night Stand) and I doubt I will in the future unless they can resurrect Chris Benoit and Eddie Guerrero, bring back RVD (and make him jump three rows into the crowd), and put people through flaming tables now and again – it’s not really worth my money otherwise. If I wanted to watch nearly naked men covered in sweat rolling around I can watch gay pornography for free online. =)

    If this whole Punk angle wasn’t McMahon’s idea he was definitely in on it. When WWE did the Attitude thing in the ‘90s they really did something different and shocked their audience; I don’t see how this is any different. I remember the Rise and Fall of ECW DVD had McMahon saying “competition is good for business,” when asked about his supporting ECW and giving them airtime on Raw. If Punk wins at the PPV and goes to Ring of Honor with the WWE title it’ll be the same thing and it’ll mean McMahon will grab his next generation talent from there instead of TNA. I’m sure the guys coming from ROH will sign for less than the TNA wrestlers (who still make jack shit – some of them are on food stamps). Guys like Orton, Cena, and the like aren’t getting any younger and eventually they’ll become worthless as wrestlers and just become mediocre performers bleeding all over the place to cover for their shoddy skills. After all, that’s what Ric Flair, Terry Funk, and many others have done.

    There’s a part of me that hopes wrestling fails and becomes an archaic form of entertainment, joining the XFL in the television graveyard. I doubt this will happen – mostly because producing a wrestling show isn’t that expensive in the grand scheme of things – but it might help humanity’s evolution. Then again, I also hope American football will meet its demise but that’ll never happen in my lifetime.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s