Email This Article - Contact Us - VIP Sign-Up - Back to Home Page

|

Updated daily from the corner cubicle, Torch columnist James Caldwell's weekday blog focuses on hot topic current events and other items of interest from around wrestling.

Updated Tuesday, March 25, 2008

Why did the rating for last night's Raw drop? Well, there are several possibilities ranging from specific elements of the product to the effect of spring break. I've never seen an actual report breaking down how many schools across the U.S. go on spring break in each of the spring weeks, but anytime people get out of the regular routine - work, dinner, and Raw or school, homework, dinner, and Raw - they'll often forget that last step.

Suddenly, it's five minutes past the second hour of Raw and people realize they've been playing Guitar Hero for five hours non-stop. So, one possibility is that WWE caught a bad week with a significant number of regular viewers out of their regular routine.

The other reason is the product. Did last night's Raw feel like an epic show leading to WrestleMania? I believe so. Were there memorable segments featuring the top feuds on Raw? Yes - Flair and Michaels. Was there a mega-match or segment featuring all of the key players interacting with each other? Yes - the opening segment and main event.

So, what happened? Barring a very significant change in viewership caused by spring breakers missing the show, there must be an explanation why one of the most important shows of the year saw a considerable drop from last week and past shows before Mania.

As I wrote in my Roundtable review, I thought WWE tried too hard last night. They wanted to reinforce everything to make each match stand out on the card, but that may have turned off some viewers who wanted to feel like there was that one epic, must-see match at Mania. Is it Flair vs. Michaels? Is the Raw triple threat? Is it Show vs. Mayweather?

WWE spent the previous five weeks building and building and building the Big Three feuds. Instead of going for the cherry on top, it seemed like WWE was trying to fix certain parts of the cake when they had already built the foundation weeks ago.

The cake lost a little form. Fans might have said, "Well, I already know what the cake looks like; I already know that I'm going to buy a slice of the cake, so I don't want to see anymore changes to the cake when I already had a good picture in mind." That's the optimistic view that fans were already convinced to order the PPV and WWE will still do major business on Sunday night.

It's possible that after watching the great Flair vs. Michaels promo exchange, viewers decided that was all they needed to see. End of story. Nothing else is going to top that on the show. It will be interesting to see how the quarter-hours come in to see if that was the case or whether it was simply an across-the-board drop in each quarter hour due to WWE trying too hard to make Mania seem like kind of a big deal.

Updated Monday, March 24, 2008

Excuse the following pun, but WWE isn't kidding around with its marketing toward kids anymore. They were wishy-washy about it during the Attitude era when there was enough swearing, alcohol consumption, titillation, and misogyny to fill several R-rated movies. All of those elements have been toned down the last ten years in an effort to engage a full-scale marketing blitz toward kids.

WWE Kids magazine hits newsstands in April. (Shane McMahon is over-seeing operations, so you know this isn't a step-child project like Industry News.) The article from Variety today also indicates WWE is launching original programming on its website and looking for a TV timeslot for a kids-themed show. Do I hear a resurgence in the Saturday morning cartoon genre?

All of this begs the question of how WWE is justifying the marketing blitz toward kids. They're launching a separate website for kids, but the original website programming for kids will be right there on WWE's homepage next to the photos of divas in bikinis.

WWE is in this odd position where they're popular enough to set financial revenue records, but not popular enough to catch the eye of third-party watchdogs, as was the case during the Attitude era. And forget about the government taking a peek at WWE pushing its brand of over-muscled athletes and scantily-clad women to little six-year-old Johnny.

There have been no indications of follow-up by the committee that met with MLB, NFL, and NBA officials when Vince "flipped the finger" to the government. Just because we haven't heard anything doesn't mean there haven't been conversations, but I'm still seeing unprotected chair shots to the head, larger-than-life athletes, and Playboy-themed skits on TV these days.

Certainly a "Saturday morning cartoon" featuring the likes of Rey Mysterio and Hornswoggle (I'm picturing "Mucha Lucha") wouldn't feature the programming content you'll find on the average edition of Raw. But, the kids programming will be a vehicle to a) convince parents on the safeness of WWE's product and b) hook kids for the other WWE programming that features the aforementioned content suitable for a more mature viewing audience.

WWE's VP of marketing, Geof Rochester, told Variety just that: "A large percentage of children in America get introduced to our brand from 6 to 10 years old. We said, 'We have a strong kids audience; let's embrace that.' We want to have a lifelong relationship with these kids."

The key is parents getting involved in watching what their kids are interacting with and watching. To WWE’s credit, there is a page on their corporate website for parents. Their message reads: "If parents make the decision to allow their children to watch our programming, we encourage those parents to watch with their children. We urge parents who allow younger children to watch our programming to explain that what our Superstars do on television should not be emulated or attempted in real life."

As with most things in life, there is a balance WWE has to find. On the one hand is an amazing revenue opportunity with kids showing up at house shows in droves, and parents spending money on WWE's product for their kids. On the other hand is WWE - a publicly-traded company subject to government oversight - potentially drawing curious eyes from regulators concerned about content aimed toward kids.

Sesame Street, TMNT, Hannah Montana, Blue's Clues, and...WWE? Although advertisers are told to stay away from wrestling, the line-up of "acceptable programming" for kids could include WWE very soon. WWE's product has been toned down considerably from ten years ago, but there are still plenty of elements not suitable for kids.

WWE will try to separate the marketing toward the kids from the adults, but there will inevitably be cross-over, just as there is now. Whether anyone bats an eye remains to be seen.

I want to hear from you. Do you have a problem with WWE amping up its marketing toward kids, or is that simply a smart business move when kids are snapping up the product? Drop me a line in the Corner Cube inbox for future posting.

Send feedback on this article to pwtorch@gmail.com and we'll regularly publish reader feedback in the "Torch Feedback" category on the Main Listing.

For more BREAKING NEWS on WWE, TNA!
VISIT OUR AFFILIATE - PROWRESTLING.NET

For UFC & MMA NEWS & BLOGS:
VISIT OUR SISTER SITE - MMATORCH.COM

Upgrade to PWTORCH VIP: DETAILS & SIGN-UP INFO

(c) 1999-2009 TDH Communications Inc. - All rights reserved.