The examiner.com is reporting that the higherups in the WWE are upset photos of the Undertaker/Michelle McCool wedding leaked to the Internets as it's kinda hard for a person in a vegetative state to marry somebody.
The Undertaker reportedly didn't attend UFC 116 because of storyline constraints.
In related news, Dirk Hayhurst deleted his recent tweet regarding him seeing HHH in the hospital after the superstar underwent arm surgery, more than likely because WWE officials asked him to.
Both are recent examples of WWE's continued efforts to unsuccessfully maneuver in the world of kayfabe when an Internet is out there to constantly poke holes in the thin veil that is kayfabe.
My question is this, and it always stems from my first article for the Bleacher Report where I went over some of the kayfabe issues regarding the firing of Bryan Danielson.
The WWE seems to have no problem announcing the release of a wrestler and making that release a WWE.com question of the day, despite the fact that in kayfabe Daniel Bryan never had a contract with the WWE, being an NXT rookie and all.
Cena breaks kayfabe in regards to the Danielson firing. The Miz discusses it on ESPN, and in both cases, the WWE seems to have no problem with the kayfabe logic of firing a wrestler who never had a contract.
At the same time, members of Nexus are reportedly never to sign autographs in public and are to maintain their 'outsider' (pardon the mid 90's pun) kayfabe image.
If the WWE wants to parade this obvious break in kayfabe for publicity, why should they care if a non-vegetative Undertaker is getting married and attending UFC fights or if the son-in-law of the CEO is having arm surgery?
Does David Otunga have to wear the "N" armband when he attends Hollywood parties with his fiance?? Just how far should kayfabe go anymore?
Dear WWE, if you want to control the kayfabe image of your product, at least be consistent about it.
Like the new article format? Send us feedback!