WWE's Recent Actions Key 1st Step in Recovering Diminishing Fanbase

The perpetually stubborn empire that is WWE is seeking help from the very fanbase it's starting to lose.

With Raw suffering from historically low ratings and a lack of spark surrounding its programming, WWE made two smart choices to counteract the issue. First, the company sought feedback from its fans with a survey centered on Raw. Secondly, it set out to hire a person whose job it is to read the criticism and support for WWE floating out there.

Neither move is monumental, but both are helpful. Both point to WWE's realization that things aren't working, and better understanding the audience is key to repairing the product.

Nothing speaks to the fact that WWE fans are drifting away like the ratings Raw is pulling in each week.

As seen on Gerweck.net, Raw earned a 2.78 rating in early June and later scored a 2.82 on June 15. Fast-forward to November and December, and Raw has tanked. The ratings for the last five editions of Raw are just plain bad:

• Nov. 2: 2.32
• Nov. 9: 2.23
• Nov. 16: 2.28
• Nov. 23: 2.16

As Dave Meltzer pointed out on F4WOnline, that last Raw had 2.95 million viewers, which is "more than 200,000 viewers lower than what had previously been the non-holiday low dating back to 1997, when Raw was losing badly to WCW Monday Nitro."

Blame Monday Night Football or changes in viewing habits all you want, but there's no denying that WWE is failing to keep its audience around. The numbers are headed in the wrong direction, as Voices of Wrestling's Brandon Howard illustrated:

WWE seems to realize there's no easy fix. It can't just add Brock Lesnar to several more shows or move the world title from Sheamus to John Cena. There's a deeper problem here. 

And so the company sought to communicate directly with fans, both those sticking around and those choosing to spend their Monday nights doing something other than watching pro wrestling.

As Geno Mrosko of Cageside Seats noted, "WWE sent out a survey to the members of its Fan Council yesterday with quite a few questions that show the company knows there are issues with its flagship program." 

The topics included when fans watch the show and at what point they decide to change the channel. Some of the most pertinent ones include:

• How have your viewing habits of Raw changed compared to the past?
• What are some reasons why you fast-forward during recorded episodes of Raw? (Commercial breaks, match not exciting, Superstar/Diva not interested in, backstage interviews, talking segments)
• If you were aware matches were going to appear during a specific hour of Raw before the airing of the show, would you be more likely to tune in to Raw during that hour?

The survey also asked if the show features talking, wrestling, backstage segments, etc., too much or too little.

WWE sends out surveys like these often, but this one had a clear focus on Raw. It gave a voice to the fans disappointed with how little Sasha Banks is being featured or how much airtime the Lana-Rusev love story has garnered. 

The fact that these questions are being asked is a welcome one. The steps following the survey are crucial, though.

As PWInsider's Dave Scherer wrote of the fan questionnaire, "Hopefully, they will get the right answers and listen to them."

That second part is key. WWE's opening itself up for criticism of Raw has to lead somewhere. There's no way to address every critique, but there's sure to be common threads among the responses.

After finding that, it's time to act. 

Brad Hamilton of WhatCulture asked, "Could this be the beginning of some major format changes to a show that has grown incredibly stagnant and formulaic?" For this process to be a success, WWE's answer to that has to be "yes."

Raw can't keep playing it safe and, as Bleacher Report's Matt Camp accused the writers of doing with the Nov. 23 show, producing something that feels phoned in:

The potentially more significant move is that WWE plans to hire someone to keep a finger on the pulse of the fanbase. On its corporate website, WWE posted a job listing for a "media monitor."

The job description is as follows:

• Monitoring media/news that involves and/or impacts WWE
• Responsible for tracking what media outlets are saying about the WWE brand and its product
• Must update data on the corporate website
• Will assist with PR related functions when needed

This can be huge. Rather than just dismiss online critics, both fans and writers, as not knowing the business enough, digging through feedback is the right move.

Not all of it will be helpful. There are some fans out there who just won't be pleased. But the Internet is rife with smart, passionate fans who love WWE and want to see it succeed. And these people often pinpoint what's wrong with the product.

This is a shift from the usual "we know what's best" mentality to better gauging how WWE is being perceived. It's a no-brainer move to add a media monitor to payroll.

To the person who eventually lands that job, here are a few places to start.

Listen to screenwriter Max Landis break down the issues with women's wrestling on The World According to Wrestling. Frequent Jim Ross' blog. Read Mick Foley's Facebook diatribes, like this one. 

Read Will Pruett of ProWrestling.net's rant on Survivor Series in which he wrote, "The largest logical fallacy of Survivor Series was assuming anything being done on this show was being done for any reason other than 'it'll shock everyone' or 'that's how we've always done it.'"

Explore the heartfelt, thoughtful opinions expressed in David Shoemaker's columns or on PWInsider, in Rolling Stone and (at the risk of a cheap plug) at Bleacher Report.

The answers are out there.

They have to be sifted out of the noise of the Internet, but they are out there. The first step to finding them is what WWE has started to do: seek them out.