Finally... Johnny Gallivan has come back to The Beast!

Shameless? Yes. Timeless? Definitely not. Pointless? Well, you be the judge.

In case you think I'm a slack reporter, let it be known that I had 75% of a report written about censorship, something that I feel very strongly about. I might polish it up at some point, but it'll probably be scrapped. So, in case I never do it, do yourselves a favor and scour some online news sites for Christopher Reeve's comments about stem cell research with regards to fighting spinal cord injuries. He makes some very good points. What does this have to do with censorship? Nothing, which is probably why the report will never see the light of day. (it was kinda all over the place)

Now, on with the main event. As a wrestling reporter and commentator, I get hung up in the actions of a few feds (FHW, LWA, OWF, etc) and often lose sight of the bigger picture. As a wrestling fan, I have been slowly but surely watching less and less WWE programming. I can now say, in all honesty, that I no longer watch the WWE. Does that mean that I'll never watch it again? Doubtful. But, until the product improves, then I just won't be wasting my time on it, let alone my money.

What was the cause of all this? Well, that's arguable, but I think it all started when WCW went out of business. WWE, even though they insisted that they were trend-setters, blatantly stole most of their good ideas from Japan, ECW, WCW, and a handful of independents. ECW and WCW especially provided a ton of ideas that they either copied, emulated, imitated, or spoofed. Some of the ideas were done better than the originals; some failed miserably. But those alternative viewpoints on wrestling were always there. They provided a kind of check system that kept WWE from veering off too far from reality. Now, with ECW and WCW gone, the WWE has no one to steal from. They even went so far as to bring in some of the minds that were behind the original ideas (Heyman, Bischoff, Russo, etc), but I really don't think they wanted to listed to what they had to say. Bischoff, for one, was brought in as an on-screen personality and nothing else. Vince likes to trick himself into thinking that he built the WWE by himself, and that all the good things that have happened over the years can be directly attributed to himself.

The WWE are victims of their own success. Like a large company that had no ideas of its own that has finally scarfed up the last of its competitors, the WWE is adrift in a sea of their own hype, with no map, no compass, and no consensus on which direction they want to go. Add to that a captain who refuses to adapt to his changing situation randomly trying switches and buttons that had worked in the past, and you have a group of individuals who are going to need some serious help before getting rescued. (because they certainly aren't going to rescue themselves)

So what was the straw that broke Johnny's back? Technically, I wasn't a WWE viewer before the fateful "Katie Vick" RAW, because the struggling fed rarely entered into my mind. But, after the WWE's latest attempt to bolster ratings by playing the "shock TV" card, I'm officially out. But you might say, "but Johnny, if you didn't even watch the show, how can you pass judgment on the WWE?" Fair question. So, in the interest of unbiased reporting, I tried my damnedest to obtain a copy of the the infamous HHH/Kane "chicken-in-a-casket" video. Unfortunately, I wasn't able to find a copy, so as a substitute, I paid very close attention to the reports; some of which were very detailed. I wasn't expecting to be shocked, but I was looking for any spark of entertainment value. From what I've heard, there wasn't any.

I can fully understand parents not wanting their kids to be watching this kind of thing, and frankly, I don't think kids should be watching the WWE at all. (but that's another story) The problem I had with the video wasn't its subject matter, it was its content. It was a shameless, tacky attempt to generate some buzz in the media by doing something that is apparently "shocking." The WWE has done this dozens (hundreds?) of times in the past, but this time it blew up in their face. Dave Scherer recently reported that members of the company were very disappointed that this "stunt" failed to generate media attention; presumably like the Billy and Chuck incident a few shows previous. In exchange for a failed attempt at publicity, the WWE has alienated even more of its longtime viewers, a preciously dwindling commodity these days.

So, if I understand why they did it, and I wasn't shocked by it, just why did I dislike the entire "Kane is a murderer" angle? Because it wasn't entertaining, and more importantly, it wasn't wrestling. Wrestling fans can only suspend disbelief up to a certain point. After it, everything just comes off as stupid and insulting to intelligence. In good wrestling promotions, the storyline is just popcorn; it's just filler to help entice people into the seats to watch a good performance. A good storyline makes the ensuing match seem that much better. But, without the match, a storyline is pointless. Now, I haven't seen the HHH/Kane match from No Mercy, but I haven't exactly heard glowing reviews about it. Once again, it seems as if WWE is losing sight of the big picture. They seem to think they are an entertainment company that just happens to have some wrestling thrown in there somewhere. I think most of you would admit that Vince would buy up a major film studio if given the chance, in order to make movies; just like he bought that Bodybuilding company and started up the XFL. Vince isn't a wrestling fan. He loves the fans because they line his pockets, but he doesn't respect them. If the WWE wasn't a solid revenue stream, he would ditch it in favor of some other enterprise in a second. Now, I don't expect him to love wrestling as the owner of the WWE, just like I don't expect the owner of the Ford Motor company to only drive Ford vehicles. It is a business, afterall. But, as the man who calls the shots on what goes on in and out of that wrestling ring, then I think it's well within my rights as a consumer to demand that he respects and enjoys wrestling. He doesn't, and I think that's obvious. He may be fine to run the business, but I think it's time to let someone who cares about wrestling run the show. So, as a fan of the WWE(F) for heaven knows how many years, I quite happily hang up the boots.

Does that mean I'm giving up on wrestling? Hell no. Other guys who still care about the business, and telling a story inside that ring will come. Whether it be NWA-TNA, XPW, UFC, or whatever collection of three letter acronyms come along, something will replace it. And maybe, when they have someone to steal from again, the WWE will get better. And then, like someone returning to an abusive relationship, I will go back to the WWE and forgive them for their sins. Afterall, I'm just a wrestling fan, plain and simple. I can't do what they do in that ring, so I live through them. It's a rather painless addiction, but I'm sure for the time being, I can find my fix somewhere else.

Ok, got a little maudlin there, so I'll end on a happier note. (just barely) If you get a chance, go see "Bowling for Columbine." Whether you like Michael Moore or not, Americans need to start thinking. (I know this is a bit of a stretch for some of you, but it has to be done) I won't pretend to be some activist, in fact I'm pretty apathetic to society as a whole, but from what I'm hearing, this film--along with being damned entertaining--will make you think... in a good way. Maybe the WWE writers should watch it, because from the looks of it, they haven't been thinking for some time now.

Ok, enough kicking them when they're down. I'm out of here. Have fun, and don't take it too seriously. Afterall, it's just a game. (and I'm not talking about wrestling) Well, on the bright side, at least I won't have to listen to Jerry Lawler scream like a 12-year-old girl anymore. See, there is a silver cloud... blah blah blah. Til next time, keep your laces tight, and your powder dry.