Raw rating lowest since July 2012

[The CyNick]

Originally Posted by BigCrippyZ That's exactly the kind of person I'd want to depose as a testifying expert witness or at least as a non-testifying consulting expert in order to explain the intricacies of an unusual subject like the backstage goings-on of pro wrestling to me. Clearly the guy's a bottom feeding joke and a hack though who doesn't know anyone in the business, have any legitimate sources or know anything.

I stopped reading The Observer long time ago, but found this on a newz site, which credits The Observer:

"Regarding WWE SmackDown moving to the USA Network in January, there is said to be at least one significant change in the works. This could have something to do with commentary or the look of the show as it appears there are no plans to bring bigger names to SmackDown."

This is the man you say is a super JOURNALIST. There will be at least ONE change, but we have no idea what it is. Why dont you just ask your source? You would think this source would have all the scoopz. Anyone could just guess that there will be changes when a show moves networks. Maybe Frank Deford should reconsider his ridiculous opinion.

[BigCrippyZ]

Originally Posted by The CyNick I stopped reading The Observer long time ago, but found this on a newz site, which credits The Observer: "Regarding WWE SmackDown moving to the USA Network in January, there is said to be at least one significant change in the works. This could have something to do with commentary or the look of the show as it appears there are no plans to bring bigger names to SmackDown." This is the man you say is a super JOURNALIST. There will be at least ONE change, but we have no idea what it is. Why dont you just ask your source? You would think this source would have all the scoopz. Anyone could just guess that there will be changes when a show moves networks. Maybe Frank Deford should reconsider his ridiculous opinion.

Is the idea that WWE is going to change something re: commentary or production/presentation for Smackdown but won't be bringing in bigger names when they move to USA not news? It's certainly news to me. I had no idea.

Now I'll agree it's not necessarily exciting news. Maybe his source is only in a position currently to know that there are plans to make changes to Smackdown and that those plans don't involve bringing in bigger names.

Should he not report that because it doesn't meet your standards of "quality" pro wrestling journalistic integrity? I'm all for having strict journalistic standards, especially as it relates to potentially damaging someone's reputation or causing inappropriate outrage or hysteria. I.e., accusing someone of a crime, making sure you report the facts accurately when reporting on criminal activities and the accused, important political, legal or policy issues, etc.

In fairness I have no idea re: the quality of Meltzer's reporting on other sports like MMA and UFC. I'd be willing to bet that his reporting on UFC, etc., might be a little more thorough re: the inner workings because 1. there's no "creative" story line planning going on that can change at any time, 2. its easier to get direct access to the competitors, their agents, UFC executives, etc. through more regular press conferences, etc., and 3. it's not "entertainment" but actual sport so there's less need to be secretive.

You're criticizing journalistic quality of people reporting on the inner workings, plans, outcomes and politics of a scripted and predetermined dramatic television show on the premise of athletic "competition". Seems to me like you take your pro wrestling "news" a little too seriously.

[Ol Dirty Dastard]

Vince and HHH cannot just be reached out to nor would they tell the truth. Remove your head from your ass

[The CyNick]

Originally Posted by Gorgeous Dale Newstead Vince and HHH cannot just be reached out to nor would they tell the truth. Remove your head from your ass

They do interviews. Vince did a shoot interview with Bob Costas and with Michael Lansberg. Vince rightfully doesnt see the dirt sheet writers as reporters. But I highly doubt the dirt sheetz reach out to either of them or Steph or Dunn. Again, like I said, they are happy being fed BS from the guy who collects the balls after practice.

Also both HHH and Vince did shoot interviews with Austin and I didn't see Austin pull any punches in terms of questions. Jericho also did a lengthy interview with HHH. Again, they covered a lot of stuff. That's what I'm saying about getting the info from the horses mouth instead of the guy who reports things like "there will be SOME change to Smackdown". How is that reporting? How about "Brock v Owens isn't on tap for Mania". Okay cool, if your sources are on point you should have the top matches or at least what Brock's match is. But he doesn't because his sources are garbage.

If you read his stuff week after week its literally littered with that kind of stuff. Then when he's flat out wrong about something, it's "plans changed". That's why as s "journalist" I rank his stuff along side those Weekly World News publications they used to have in grocery stores.

[Big Vic]

Originally Posted by The CyNick If you read his stuff week after week its literally littered with that kind of stuff. Then when he's flat out wrong about something, it's "plans changed".

Kinda like the Cesaro Big show feud right?

[The CyNick]

Originally Posted by Big Vic Kinda like the Cesaro Big show feud right?

What's this about now?

[BigCrippyZ]

Originally Posted by The CyNick They do interviews. Vince did a shoot interview with Bob Costas and with Michael Lansberg. Vince rightfully doesnt see the dirt sheet writers as reporters. But I highly doubt the dirt sheetz reach out to either of them or Steph or Dunn. Again, like I said, they are happy being fed BS from the guy who collects the balls after practice. Also both HHH and Vince did shoot interviews with Austin and I didn't see Austin pull any punches in terms of questions. Jericho also did a lengthy interview with HHH. Again, they covered a lot of stuff. That's what I'm saying about getting the info from the horses mouth instead of the guy who reports things like "there will be SOME change to Smackdown". How is that reporting? How about "Brock v Owens isn't on tap for Mania". Okay cool, if your sources are on point you should have the top matches or at least what Brock's match is. But he doesn't because his sources are garbage. If you read his stuff week after week its literally littered with that kind of stuff. Then when he's flat out wrong about something, it's "plans changed". That's why as s "journalist" I rank his stuff along side those Weekly World News publications they used to have in grocery stores.

Completely ignore the fact that you're evidence that Vince & HHH will do interviews with anyone who tries hard enough to get an interview is based on the fact that they've done a few interviews in the past with two guys who 1. worked for and were big, successful stars for the company, 2. probably had relatively good/close relationships with them and 3. who are basically celebrities outside of wrestling now too that also have big followings of non-wrestling and wrestling fans. Let's say that you're presumption is true, anyone who tries hard enough to get in touch with HHH or Vince or Stephanie or Dunn, would be able to do so, even a legit reporter or someone from a dirt sheet.

I've yet to hear Austin or Jericho (or even someone from an actual non dirt sheet news publisher like NYT, Sports Illustrated, etc.) ever ask someone in the position of Vince or HHH, "So, what are the main event plans for the next PPV or the next Mania?" or "What are the future creative plans for Superstar X?". Let alone have I heard them ever answer a question like that. That's because Vince, HHH & co. have no incentive to 1. tell them the plans and 2. be truthful about the plans. What would be the point? They'd be giving away the outcome and costing themselves potential revenues. Not to mention the fact that they can (and likely do) change the plans as needed or desired.

[BigCrippyZ]

Originally Posted by The CyNick That's what I'm saying about getting the info from the horses mouth instead of the guy who reports things like "there will be SOME change to Smackdown". How is that reporting?

I agree that simply saying there will be SOME change to Smackdown isn't as much news as rumor or speculation.

The point is, he didn't just say there will be some change to Smackdown, he qualified that by saying there will be some change to Smackdown but it won't involve bringing in bigger names to the show and it likely will involve a change in production or commentary. In addition, you have no idea who or how credible his sources may or may not be simply because you don't know who they are.

Originally Posted by The CyNick But being so vague proves to me his sources are junk and makes everything else in the story suspect.

That doesn't prove anything of the sort. If anything it proves that his sources MAY be junk. Or it could prove that like most journalists he is protecting his sources and himself. It could also just as likely be evidence that his sources told him "Vince is constantly changing his mind, so who knows if this info will be good in a week, but here's what I've heard..." The point is you don't know and you're making a huge presumption that Meltzer and his sources aren't credible.

Again, I think you take your pro wrestling news a little too seriously.

Maybe his sources are credible, maybe not. Maybe plans will change, maybe not. Either way, it's pro wrestling news, not political world affairs, a criminal accusation or anything remotely similar. We're all taking it with a grain of salt.

Meanwhile you're just complaining that it's not credible because the reporters may or may not be getting credible info (with little actual proof to the contrary other than presumptions) while making a living/money off of it. News flash. There are lots of journalists (and I'd argue most) making as much or more money than guys like Meltzer, who are reporting on much larger, more important and consequential stories with sources that are just as credible/non-credible.

I think whoever posted it earlier was possibly onto something. Sounds like you're jealous and bitter at the dirt sheet reporters.

[The CyNick]

Originally Posted by BigCrippyZ Is the idea that WWE is going to change something re: commentary or production/presentation for Smackdown but won't be bringing in bigger names when they move to USA not news? It's certainly news to me. I had no idea. Now I'll agree it's not necessarily exciting news. Maybe his source is only in a position currently to know that there are plans to make changes to Smackdown and that those plans don't involve bringing in bigger names. Should he not report that because it doesn't meet your standards of "quality" pro wrestling journalistic integrity? I'm all for having strict journalistic standards, especially as it relates to potentially damaging someone's reputation or causing inappropriate outrage or hysteria. I.e., accusing someone of a crime, making sure you report the facts accurately when reporting on criminal activities and the accused, important political, legal or policy issues, etc. In fairness I have no idea re: the quality of Meltzer's reporting on other sports like MMA and UFC. I'd be willing to bet that his reporting on UFC, etc., might be a little more thorough re: the inner workings because 1. there's no "creative" story line planning going on that can change at any time, 2. its easier to get direct access to the competitors, their agents, UFC executives, etc. through more regular press conferences, etc., and 3. it's not "entertainment" but actual sport so there's less need to be secretive. You're criticizing journalistic quality of people reporting on the inner workings, plans, outcomes and politics of a scripted and predetermined dramatic television show on the premise of athletic "competition". Seems to me like you take your pro wrestling "news" a little too seriously.

If the story is "no big names will be used" and he has a credible source, sure that's news. But being so vague proves to me his sources are junk and makes everything else in the story suspect.

He's kinda irrelevant when it comes to MMA journalism in my onion. Helwani gets all the big interviews and Front Row Brian is a better source for what I would call behind the scenes info. His website isn't what I would call must visit when it comes to MMA info. He can't play the same game with UFC that he does with WWE.

I don't care what he does. People who are dumb enough to spend 12$ a month to hear his quarter truths can do what they want. But he passes himself off as a journalist, so I think it's fair to question his practices. Especially when much of what he "reports" is just flat out wrong or can't be proven.