I know I only have myself to blame for being peeved at this... but I'll rant about it anyways.
I usually use a1wrestling.com as my portal to find out what sites have been updated (even though more than half the sites listed are no longer being refreshed anymore), and I saw on 1wrestling.com a headline reading "WWE CHAMPIONSHIP CHANGES HANDS ON EUROPEAN TOUR". This led me to the following article:
Nunzio captured his second WWE Cruiserweight Championship from Juvi in front of a delighted crowd in Italy.
Now... I'm sure that Nunzio is very happy about his title win, and I'm glad that 1wrestling broke the news on this (at least I think they did), but why couldn't they have put "A WWE Championship Changes Hands"? Clearly, the implication was that John Cena dropped the WWE Championship in Europe.
And I'm pretty sure I already know the answer: they want people to click there and read the article. Fine. But wouldn't news of a cruiserweight title change received some decent hits as well?
What's worse, though, is that this was written by Joey Styles, a WWE employee. Not to say WWE doesn't give us bait and switch every now and then, but their own website wouldn't resort to a tactic like this.
Look, I hope that Joey gets the Raw announcing gig, as I've been really impressed with his work so far. But I would think that 1wrestling doesn't have to keep pulling cheap stunts like this.
I'm more surprised at the fact that WWE is allowing Styles to continue at all with 1wrestling.com. I'm pretty sure Bob Ryder was still with 1wrestling while working for WCW (though I fail to remember to what extent), but I figured McMahon and company wouldn't really tolerate employees working for news sites.
But anyway, yes. The bait and switch is very annoying, and this certainly isn't the first time I've seen it used. I don't visit 1wrestling enough to say whether or not they use it and/or with what frequency, but I think you make a good point. Now that it's been clearly established that Cena's title is simply the "WWE Championship," a headline like that goes from misleading to teetering on the brink of an outright lie.
PWInsider.som is the KING of that bait-and-switch crap. Just a few months ago, one of their headlines read "Former WWE world champion leaves company, last show will be this weekend", and the story is about freakin IVORY. Hey, I love Ivory just like everybody else, but c'mon now.
It's either that or "ACTUAL PHOTOCOPY OF JOEY STYLE'S WWE CONTRACT, LINDA MCMAHON DATED ANOTHER WRESTLING PROMOTER BEFORE SHE MET VINCE, TNA RELOCATES HEADQUARTERS TO STAMFORD, FOOTAGE OF STEPHANIE & HHH ARGUING BACKSTAGE SURFACES ONLINE, AND MORE!!", then you click on it & it's another damn advertisement for their "premium" pay site.
Actually, Joey / 1BOB "obtained" this story from pwinsider...
WWE HAS TITLE CHANGE ON FIRST SHOW OF EUROPEAN TOUR by Mike Johnson 11/15/2005 4:00:00 PM
(same Nunzio story)
Re: "bait and switch", Scherer addressed this in a recent Q and A:
READER QUESTION: I sent this question to PWInsider a few months ago but I noticed it wasn't answered so I thought I would try asking again. One thing I find very hypocritical of the PWI site is when you guys rip on the WWE about false advertising. You recently did this when the WWE advertised Edge for the PPV only to pull him from the match. You guys ripped on the WWE for false advertising even though you guys do the same thing with your headlines. For example you recently posted this headline on your site... "WHAT HAPPENED WHEN BRET HART RAN INTO A CURRENT WWE STAR, LIFE AFTER WWE FOR CHRISTIAN, WHY SHELTON BENJAMIN IS ON HEAT INSTEAD OF RAW, AND MORE". When a reader sees this headline they think they will get a news article when they click on it instead it ends up being a cheap plug for your ELITE section with no news at all. Anybody with a brain knows you guys do this not only to plug your ELITE and make it seem like something special but also because the more hits you get the more ad revenue you will make. You guys talk about the WWE using false advertising to increase revenue and you guys are doing the same thing. Pretty hypocritical in my opinion I would just wondering if you guys would address this in the AskPWI column so everybody would hear your response.
SCHERER ANSWER: Your argument holds no water, and here is why. When WWE false advertised Edge for the Taboo Tuesday PPV (even though they knew he was hurt and could not work), they did so on a product that you had to pay 35 dollars to see. If you were an Edge fan and plunked down 35 bucks to watch your favorite guy wrestle, you got screwed over. And, it's not like WWE didn't know in advance that he couldn't work. They did know, but they didn't tell the fans.
The headline you are referring to appears on our free site. It doesn't cost you a penny to read it, or the story that follows. Aside from that, we do mention part of the story in the headlines you refer to. To get the rest of it, you have to go to the Elite site but if you want to find out the whole story on any of those headlines you can, absolutely free, as we give everyone a chance to peruse our Elite section for three days, free of charge. In addition to being incorrect in your comparison, you also missed the fact that you can get your hands on our pay content without paying for it. So you see, you are comparing apples to tractor trailers here.
One last thing, just so you know why the headlines you object to are so important to the site. The Elite section is vital to the survival of this website, without it there would no free site. While over 90% of our users come from the free side of the site, 75% of our revenue comes from the Elite side. Frankly, it's what keeps us in business. We have three full time employees that work long hours to update the site as much as humanly possible. As much as we all love wrestling, we can't work 10 hour days if we can't pay our bills. The Elite side of the site allows us all to do that, so if you ever want to support the site the best way possible, signing up for an Elite subscription is the best way to do it.
* * * * * *
In essence, it's all a matter of perception, I guess. Weird how the answer was worked into a blues-crying sales pitch, but whatever
Demonstrations are a drag. Besides, we're much too high
With due respect to the people that have the actual sources, I generally get my fill of news from 411, 1wrestling being absolutely excruciating (worst of the 'legit' lot) to try and get through. And if you think 1wrestling is bad, remember the wild "click me!" bogus headlines on the lesser rehash sites. For me, I get enough of the backstage info, and I can always go to 1wrestling, Online Onslaught, or PWI for a really big story, like this past week. I understand why they do it, but I hate clicking through 5 or 6 pages of a news report.
On a bit of a sidetrack, has Styles actually signed a full-time announcing contract yet? I imagine he would have some leverage to try and keep his stake in 1wrestling, but that seems like it would be a disaster waiting to happen the first time a big item broke on Joey's site. But as far as I've heard, it's a day-to-day deal since he was called in for Taboo Tuesday - anyone know better?
Meltzer has said Joey's got a one year contract which is basically a pay per performance gig where either side can option out of it any time. If everything is copacetic after year one, the idea is Joey would sign a long term deal.
Originally posted by RYDER FAKINRe: "bait and switch", Scherer addressed this in a recent Q and A:
The point Scherer's making in that piece doesn't apply to Canadian Bulldog's beef, though. Scherer's talking about links which neither confirm nor deny how many hoops you have to jump through to see the content. Bulldog's complaining about links which completely mislead you about what the content is in the first place.
The former is something that bugs me, but I know news sites have to pay the bills so I accept it. The latter is just a cheap tactic, especially since it's often used with totally free newspieces, so it's nothing but a way to boost page (and ad) views.
I got roped in by the "WWE [Cruiserweight] Championship changes hands" link too, although I suspected right from the start that something was up. If Cena had lost the WWE Heavyweight title, the link would have just said "CENA LOSES WWE TITLE," because that's even more certain to get your attention. I've come to learn from reading A1wrestling that when they don't tell you who the wrestler is in the link, then you probably won't care who the wrestler is in the story. "Former WWE champion jumps to TNA" will mean Former WWE Tough Enough Champion Jackie Gayda, not Chris Jericho. "Wrestler from the '80s passes away" will mean some jobber you don't remember, not Hacksaw Jim Duggan.
I was wondering about the origins of 'smackdown'. I didn't think it was something the Rock would have come up with. I wonder if there are any other *industry* specific publications which have an Obscure References section.