|
Meltzer clearly gets inside information. He's been right about lots of things. This seems weirdly insignificant, but Randy Orton winning the 2017 Royal Rumble always comes to mind. I'd have no clue that was happening if Meltzer didn't report it. But more and more Meltzer seems to be going to the odds-makers because they seem to know way more than he does.
I don't expect him to be unbiased. I really don't. And I can understand when he has to cover so many hours of this shit that he wants the underdogs to succeed. And they're his friends, so he's going to curve towards them. I actually don't mind that. But that doesn't mean he can't report things as they happen. He doesn't need to flat-out lie about the AEW side to make them look better and the WWE side to make them look worse. And, for the most part, I do think he does a decent job of that. But I dunno, maybe I should be madder at him?
He does need to keep himself relevant, and his latest way of doing that has been to appeal to the smarks. They're the ones that subscribe. So he tells them that AEW wins in the key demos but SmackDown is down in viewership (despite SmackDown doing better in the key demos in its slot than AEW does in its). He'll tell them that Randy Orton is a money-hungry grub and AEW was too smart to sign him, but then Tony Khan will come out on Twitter and whinge about being played. AEW can "get everyone they want." Marty Scurll re-signs with ROH. Vince McMahon is taking over NXT. Nope.
It's tough when you're reporting on what used to be such a secretive business, because a lot of the time you will be reporting hearsay and rumors from guys lower on the pecking order with an axe to grind. It would actually take a lot of discernment and talent to be able to separate the fact from the fiction there. But lately Meltzer has just been rankling me with the "AEW is winning" narrative, which is very clearly a rosy-glassed view of things.
* Their TV deal only for $45 million a year. That might be fine to have in your personal bank account, but it's chump change for a TV deal -- especially when you are going to be offering more content. When you factor in that back in 2016 it cost $880k to run your average Raw, if you multiply that by 51, you get...$44.9 million. Coincidence? Maybe. But it sounds to me a lot like the Saudi announcement WWE made when they got stranded. It was details already known, but they just came out and said it to make it sound new and like a development.
* The TV ratings "war" between these two shows is ridiculous. Nielsen themselves suggest a 10% era of margin either way on their reporting. This isn't like the Monday Night Wars when the WWF would register a 4.9 and WCW would be getting a 3.5 or whatever. These ratings are within a stone's throw from each other each week and a narrative is being painted of AEW far and away having the larger fan-base. Meanwhile WWE is still killing them with Raw and SmackDown, which should be shameful with the state those shows are reportedly in most weeks.
It's just exhausting seeing the myth reported as reality. I get that fans want AEW to do well, Meltzer among them. But it doesn't help them, nor does it help wrestling, for them to be dishonest about what it's achieved and the direction it is trending. That will just end in a further monopoly for Vince.
|