WWE & the Reality Era: A Sign of Change or Repackaging the Status Quo?

"

“We emphasize that we believe in change because we were born of it, we have lived by it, we prospered and grew great by it. So the status quo has never been our god, and we ask no one else to bow down before it.”     

                                      — Carl T. Rowan

"

When we talk about the status quo in the WWE what exactly are we talking about? Are we talking about repetitive world title reigns from the company’s two biggest stars John Cena and Randy Orton? Perhaps we’re talking about the company’s inability or reluctance to push younger superstars into the main event spotlight; instead relying on proven older stars that, for the most part, are well past their prime. Maybe, we’re talking about a combination of the two.

What exactly is status quo for the WWE?

To answer this question we first need to understand what “status quo” actually means…    

The term status quo is a commonly used form of the original Latin "status quo"—literally "the state in which"—is a Latin term meaning the current or existing state of affairs. To maintain the status quo is to keep things the way they presently are, and in the case of the WWE it means to rely on the same complacency, principals, morals, marketing, politics, and product that made the company famous nearly six decades ago.

While the WWE has taken massive strides in recent years to change the principals, practices, and morals of its employees with the induction of the company’s Wellness program, a program that now restricts, watches, and records the use of steroids, drugs and alcohol; The WWE has basically stuck to the same structure in 2011 that it had in the 1960s.

Can you really blame them? The WWE has become its own entity just like the NFL, MLB, and NBA. They, like the others, have a successful business model that has allowed them to stay relevant since the 1960s; not many companies can say that. The corporate suits running the show know what works, and choose to maintain the same business model and practices rather than adapt to changing consumer habits, wants, needs, and the ever evolving teenage and young adult demographic that doesn’t even know what it wants half the time. 

The WWE truly feels like they don’t need to change because of their “if it isn’t broke, then why fix it?” mentality. While dwindling ratings and pay-per-view buys say otherwise the WWE will always survive as long as there’s a need for professional wrestling. They are the say all and end all of their product market.  

The Status Quo through the Multiple Eras

Some of the biggest cries that are heard from the hardcore, loyal, and passionate fans are the need for better story-telling and direction. The term “dropping the ball” has become synonymous with the WWE in the eyes of its fans. Whether it’s through a lack of clear vision and direction, under using stars that are beloved by fans, or the constant process of taking two steps forward and three steps back in the supposed consensus mind of its fan base; The WWE has been disappointing the minority while captivating and enthralling the majority for years… and will continue to do so until a mass uprising happens from the millions of fans that promote the product.

The WWE through its rich history have always relied on character driven story-arcs (some excellent, good, and bad) that have been rehashed and recycled since its inception maintaining the status quo the entire time.

Is there a huge difference between Hulk Hogan feuding with a foreigner in the Iron Sheik over the WWE championship in1984 and John Cena feuding with current champion Alberto Del Rio in 2011?

What about the multiple reincarnations of popular stables such as: Degeneration-X, the NWO, The Four Horsemen, and multiple rebellions and invasions from “corporate” factions?  

A difference from Hogan’s multiple title runs and Cena’s, Triple-H’s, Stone Cold, or the Rock’s?

Is there really any difference from the ascent of Randy Orton to fame and The Rock’s?

Is Batista and Sheamus’s ascent different to the ascent of Triple-H?

Are the stories of anti-heroes CM Punk, Stone Cold Steve Austin so different?

Every characters story is a rehash of the previous generation’s superstars before them. The WWE has been telling the same stories for forever, but each new generation of fan doesn’t seem to realize this. It’s been the same since your parents were born and it’ll still be the same when your kids are born.  

There must have been a time period I missed when the WWE did everything right and basically did the opposite of what they built their company’s massive popularity on. Oh yea, I almost forgot. That time period to a majority of their fans is infamously known as “The Attitude Era” (1997-2001) when the likes of Stone Cold, Triple-H, the Rock, The Undertaker, and Mick Foley became household names.

In reality the WWE didn’t do anything special, or anything it hadn’t been already doing for multiple decades before this besides being blessed with an unbelievable pool of talent. They basically went with a much edgier approach that broke the mold of the “Golden Era” that saw Hulk Hogan, Randy Savage, and the Ultimate Warrior rise to fame. This was due to a change in wrestling culture if anything.

The rise of ECW, a much smaller wrestling promotion built around the “hardcore” aspect of wrestling, revolutionized the way pro wrestling fans viewed the product. The WWE needed to compete with its changing consumer needs and thus “The Attitude Era” was born. The WWE saw a sudden rise to heights it never saw before because it no longer tried to tailor itself to kids and families, but to the edgier teenage and adult demographic that became enamored with the violence, swearing, semi-nudity, and use of “blood” that other wrestling promotions were using.

The WWE never wanted to portray their product like this, but was ultimately forced to because their competition was rapidly preparing to overtake them (and at one point did) as the super power of professional wrestling. The provocative style made wrestling “cool again” and issued in a re-birth to the entire industry. The status quo had partially been broken, but eventually returned when the product became a caricature of itself in the mid 2000s in the appropriately named “Ruthless Aggression Era” by relying too heavily on the themes that made the “Attitude Era” so popular.

If ECW revolutionized the wrestling industry it’s also responsible for setting a standard the WWE, and pro wrestling in general, could never fully commit to. It was only a matter of time before the “hardcore” premise became too over the top, de-sensitizing its fan base to expect too many large bumps that were becoming both increasingly dangerous and ludicrous. The status quo had been there for a reason.

If anything the “Attitude Era” was better for having the best storytelling, emotion, and having a large selection of future Hall of Famers. The status quo was always there, but hidden amongst bra and panty matches, blood profusely dripping from wrestlers, the use of colorful language, and chair shots to the head.  

The WWE made a tremendous change, and one that doesn’t get the credit it deserves, to their product towards the end of the 2000s when it ushered in the “PG Era.” This was a return to the themes of the “Golden Era” and a far cry from the themes and matches the “Attitude Era” was responsible for. With this drastic overhaul of their product the WWE ushered in a complete return to the status quo.  

Welcome to the Reality Era

The one glaring problem the “PG Era” had was the fact that it was the complete opposite of what a massive generation of wrestling fans grew up knowing about wrestling. No more blood, no swearing, it’s edginess was all but lost, and replaced with cookie cutter versions of wrestlers who once again appealed to kids and families over the “attitude” demographic that now had the largest voice within the online community.

Wrestling was no longer “cool” but a Disneyfied version that millions no longer wanted to associate themselves with. Not to mention the fact that many of the company’s biggest stars from past eras were fading away with no one to replace them because of the WWE’s total lack of faith in its younger superstars. Although the era never really lasted long it was doomed to fail because the company failed to realize that with the “Attitude Era” came a slightly new definition of the status quo.

We witnessed the birth of a new era from the mouth of CM Punk who, in six minutes with a microphone, changed the landscape and direction of the company… kind of. The controversy and storytelling that CM Punk brought to the WWE in late June reminded the masses of the “Attitude Era” and catapulted what would become to be known as the “Reality Era.” It became a mixture of 70 percent “PG” and 30 percent “Attitude.” This concoction once again revitalized a stale product and ushered back many of the fans that had long abandoned the company. A certain degree of edginess had been brought back to the product that had now found a perfect mixture of where it wanted to be all while maintaining that pesky status quo.

But what is the status quo for the WWE?

Look no further then CM Punk and the WWE’s use of social media and the internet in order to find the WWE’s status quo within this new era. Punk had become an instant megastar overnight fueled by constant controversy that the WWE needed to maintain in order to milk every penny out of his explosion. New merchandise (which Punk sells the most of now), a face turn to appeal to a mass audience, slogans, gear, music, and the use of social media as a median to fuel controversy and feuds were all created to capitalize off of the WWE’s new found “edginess.”

The WWE had won the lottery with Punk’s edgy heel character that all throughout the summer brought controversy, speculation, and outside media attention to the WWE. The status quo that has lingered for decades within the WWE was made blatantly apparent upon Punk’s newfound popularity.  

Some might argue (as I once did) that Punk sold out, but in reality he became part of the corporate machine that his stage character was adamantly against. This is wrestling after all which likes to play with the imaginary line of reality and fiction. Punk’s character, which was quickly becoming known for crossing the imaginary line, can’t really exist within the status quo of the WWE.

A renegade character was seen before in Stone Cold Steve Austin, but even he was brought back down and contained within the WWE status quo “bubble.” The WWE uses the popularity to fuel not only the career of the superstar, but to dilute the characters traits into a more manageable marketing tool to promote the company as well.

“The Reality Era”, sparked by the sudden explosion in use of Twitter, Facebook, and online content has seen the same fate. What was once a “cool” way of experimenting with new feuds and direction that had a bit of underground edginess to it has now been marketed, and made more manageable to mass market.

When Punk invaded an interview, after he “left” the company, being held by Triple-H it had a remarkably different feel then anything we’d seen before.  A couple months later the WWE now shows all of this content as part of the show (showing The Miz and Truth’s YouTube video on Raw was lame) instead of allowing it to have the renegade feel that made it “cool.”

Twitter handles are now seen along with the entrance of superstars, WWE Youtube videos are now being mass produced, and the individual voice that these superstars had on their personal twitter accounts has been reduced to “part of the act.”

Welcome to the WWE status quo. For better or worse it’s made the company what it is today; A billion dollar empire of mass media, merchandising, movies, video games, ticket sales, and sold out arenas. In essence everything is a gimmick within the WWE universe, but it works for them and entertains millions simultaneously.

Perhaps it’s time for the WWE to change their status quo, but to what? If your reading this then you’re a fan, which means the status quo is working. It may enrage us to see where the company could go, but chooses not to; but in the end it’s a system that works and will continue to work for generations to come.

"

“Status quo, you know, is Latin for 'the mess we're in.”
                                   — Ronald Reagan 

"