Thoughts on sharing unverified rumors, and the failure of the Wrestling Media

Good day to everyone, especially the New York Knicks, who are on the verge of winning their first NBA Finals Championship since 1973. One more to go. 

I wanted to expand on my thoughts regarding the CM Punk rumors and how the professional wrestling industry is covered. Joe & Rich from Voices of Wrestling opened the Flagship with this discussion, and I felt they both genuinely understood my intent behind going public with an unverified rumor. I found myself responding out loud, so I figured I'd write my responses and post them on the shitty blog.

Let's start with a question posed by Joe: 

Should reporters/journalists/wrestling media acknowledge unverified rumors?

The Wrestling Media should acknowledge unverified rumors if they come from credible sources. 

I'll use myself and the infamous "Cody story" I've been alluding to since he departed from All Elite Wrestling. I know with great certainty that several media outlets heard a very specific version of events that led to Cody's AEW departure, and they aren't particularly flattering to The Codester. I also know a prominent WWE Superstar was privately told this specific story by a member of the media. 

As most of you are aware, I'm not particularly fond of Rhodes. I think he can be a brilliant performer who, unfortunately, plays into his worst instincts far too often, and I believe he reeks with insincerity. I would love to see this man humbled, but I've been muzzled for nearly 5 years. I have to respect that my only source - and it's a great source - does not want me to go public with it, and I haven't been able to get confirmation elsewhere.

Another example is Britt Baker. I've repeatedly said that I haven't heard more negative stories about an active wrestler than I have about Baker, and have alluded to a very specific story that seemingly no one wants to touch. I'm open to any opportunity to gain more legitimacy, and I could put it out there in the same vein as the Punk rumor; however, I recognize this unverified rumor would bring harassment toward Baker (and others). There's a real-world consequence that could make her life very hard, and it would be irresponsible of me to reveal certain allegations knowing no one will work to confirm or deny the story.

But guess what? I would put both stories out there if a few sources I trust verify even bits and pieces of each. I wouldn't concern myself with whether or not Rhodes, Baker, or anyone from AEW/WWE wants it out there. It's not their choice. It's a journalist doing their job: reporting the truth. 

Punk has been absent from WWE television for nearly 2 months, after explicitly stating during an in-ring promo that he wasn't going to take a vacation. Yet here we are, ~52 days later, and we've only seen him give short, fluff interviews and gotten a glimpse of his new, absurdly and comically large physique while working out at the gym. 

It's natural to ask about his whereabouts, which the media has. The issue in this case is their insistence on taking the word of their WWE sources and doing little to challenge them. 

WWE is struggling in nearly every aspect; again, I'm not predicting their demise, and the pro wrestling industry is notorious for its viewership volatility. That said, they could very clearly use someone like Punk to give themselves a boost, yet he's nowhere to be found? What does that say about Paul Levesque and his creative team? How could Creative not have anything for the caliber of Punk's starpower, especially during such a creative rut? 

The next retort has become, "He's just resting and will be back by Summerslam." Okay...but how do we know that's really the case? I've made this comparison often, but WWE is very much like our current administration: it's run by soulless, greedy ghouls with a reputation for shamelessly lying and never taking full responsibility for anything.

My point being: the wrestling media has shown a lack of urgency and has become far too comfortable waiting for information to come to them. It doesn't pass the sniff test that Creative has nothing for him, and if that really is the case, then where are the pieces critical of WWE's creative process? What are Punk's feelings that he evidently has nothing to offer in the here and now? What do his peers think? How does TKO feel about one of their top-paid stars sitting at home, collecting a very large paycheck? How did Punk get so unbelievably jacked in a relatively short amount of time? 

We don't know the answer to these questions because they aren't asked, or, if they are, the answers are usually left in a private inbox that may be brought up later. 

PW Insider reported that WWE was creating new merchandise for Punk's eventual return, and it was presented with a certain air of arrogance and smugness, like, "I can't believe we have to acknowledge an unverified rumor, but let me get off my fat ass and debunk it." 

Part of my "report" was that Punk is allegedly slated to face - and beat - the Codester for one of their World titles at Summerslam. I do not doubt he'll eventually return, but don't you dare make anyone feel stupid for asking about Punk's whereabouts. It is your job to uncover why he hasn't been on television. It is not your job to run correction pieces for WWE.

The current shape of the Wrestling Media

Here's an unfortunate truth: we cannot rely on them to consistently and responsibly practice journalism. It's an absolute joke seeing stars like Becky Lynch and her idiot husband sit down for these bullshit fluff pieces when they should be relentlessly asked about the Janel Grant Lawsuit, the alleged pay cuts, how the women feel about Brock Lesnar's return, what they knew about Vince McMahon, and when they knew it, and a host of other things with real-world implications.

It's also uncomfortable seeing certain Wrestling Media figures openly flaunting their casual relationships with the individuals they're supposed to cover. It's beyond inappropriate and makes my skin crawl. The post-PLE (and AEW PPV) "media" scrums are an utter embarrassment that no serious journalist would ever take part in. Yet, nearly all of them do, and their bar is so damn low that they receive kudos for asking a mildly uncomfortable question. 

Let's circle back to the pay cut story and why it angers me: I know that several Wrestling Media figures know who agreed to pay cuts, but they're bound by their agreement to be off the record. First off, maybe you should stop agreeing to talk off the record. Second, you should be seeking confirmation from your other sources. 

It is an absolute joke that these names haven't been leaked, and it's not because I want to see anyone affiliated with WWE publicly humiliated. I believe we, the fans, and the next generation of wrestlers deserve to know the names of the individuals who helped a billion-dollar corporation set a dangerous precedent of underpaying their talent. 

If we want wrestling fans to be more educated and in tune with the industry, there needs to be an effort to analyze and break down the news, and that simply rarely happens. Meltzer is the most consistent in this particular regard, but he cannot do it alone. 

We need voices who are actually interested in the pro wrestling industry and its history. They are failing to meet the moment. 

Will I continue sharing credible but unverified rumors?

Yes. I am tired of hearing salacious WWE stories in private, only for the media to be muzzled. I am tired of how the WWE roster is treated with kid gloves. I completely understand the need to maintain a good, professional relationship with the people you cover, but you've all grown far too comfortable in appeasing them. It is irresponsible to agree to talk off the record when the subject contains real-world implications. It is irresponsible to sit back and wait for a DM from a source rather than chase stories. 

I do not think anything will change, and I will likely get blowback from this piece, but who cares? I love pro wrestling. It's an art form with a long, rich history that literally spans across the globe. I revere pro wrestling, and I'm currently engaging in a project to learn more about its history. It makes me angry how it's treated by several people tasked with covering it.

My final plea: stop treating the people you cover as friends whom you handle with kid gloves. Stop showing up to these bullshit media scrums that offer absolutely nothing of value. Stop employing people who openly identify as fans of any promotion. Stop providing segment-by-segment recaps of shows. 

Start asking difficult questions. Start hunting for information. Be aggressive, and do your jobs with greater urgency. Make an effort to hone your journalistic instincts and realize when something simply doesn't pass the sniff test.

Nothing about the Punk story, as presented by the Wrestle Media, passed the smell test. It's why I decided to put it out there, because WWE fans should be demanding answers. I could not imagine if Jalen Brunson disappeared from the Knicks for 2 months, and the media just accepted what they were told by the organization - or the player himself. 

It should not have to take an anonymous Twitter user to force you to look into a story, whether or not it's true. 

But I will keep going.