Want more wrestling news, rumors, and results? Be sure to visit PWInsider.com and PWInsiderXtra.com.
You can send us questions for the PWInsider.com Q and A at pwinsider@gmail.com.
I watched the Bruce Prichard video that you had on the site on Sunday. He talked a lot about house show attendance and things reported as fact when they weren’t. He said that there was no accountability and that anything can be reported as fact when it’s not. For example, he mentioned giving official numbers for attendance to reporters, only to see a different number get reported. Mark Henry also made the point that people report things that they weren’t there to actually see. Did you watch the interview? If so, what do you think about what he said?
After getting this question, I did indeed go and watch the interview. There is one thing he said that I completely agree with, and that is that some sites do indeed post anything, whether it’s sourced or not, as a way to get clicks. I see it all the time. Sites “report” pure garbage solely as clickbait. I hate that practice as much as he does. It gives all of us that do what we do a bad name.
So let’s get into “what we do”. The fact of the matter is, there are not a lot of sites that actually break news concerning the business. There are actually very few of us. The rest of the sites out there are repeaters, as in they just take information that sites like this one report and then reword it and post it on their own. Of those outlets, some try and do things the right way while others are in it for clicks. I don’t think Bruce was referring to them as they don’t break news, they just regurgitate it. Obviously, accountability to them isn’t an issue since they are simply citing other outlets rather than gathering and reporting actual news.
Speaking for myself and this site, we don’t fit his statement. Accountability is very, very important to us. We would rather be late to an important story while we try to confirm it than be out in front and get aspects of it, if not the whole thing, wrong. We hold ourselves to old school reporting standards, where we at least second source stories, and do all that we can to get to the truth. Sometimes, you can’t get to that point so we are clear to report things as “what we are being told” rather that “this is a stone cold fact”. With some stories, where first hand accounts are the only the only source of the information and those involved aren't talking, it can, at times, be very irresponsible to report something as an indisputable “fact”. It depends on the situation and the story.
Another area where we have accountability is in personal matters and unverified claims. If wrestler A is cheating on their significant other, that’s not news to us. If that wrestler is cheating and it becomes a public issue, or affects their status, with their significant other, then it is. If wrestler B goes on Twitter and makes heinous claims against wrestler C, it’s not a news story. If wrestler B files legal documentation with those claims, then it is.
Bruce never mentioned us by name or in any examples that he gave so I am assuming he was not talking about us. The things he said don’t pertain to what we do.
As you said, he mentioned show attendance and how he would give the actual numbers, which was something he had access to in WWE, only to see different numbers reported. I never spoke to him and I can’t speak to what he said, but if he gave the accurate numbers to a reporter and they reported something else, I can see how he would feel the way he does. It’s frustrating to give someone legitimate, factual information and see something else reported. It has happened to me in the past and it’s a big part of the reason you are reading this today and one of the pillars on which this site was built, doing everything we can to get to and report the truth.
We do try to exhaust all avenues to get to the real story and in the rare instances we get it wrong, we make a point to do a mea culpa and apologize for our error and retract it. That is the responsible thing to do and we will always do it. Not acknowledging mistakes hurts a reporter's credibility.
What Mark Henry said is interesting, and its something I have heard wrestlers say for years. It’s also something I have observed myself. It’s no secret that back in the day I had full access in ECW. There were more times than I can remember where I would witness something and when reports of what happened came out later, they were not even close to the truth. I knew that for a fact because I had seen what had actually occurred yet outlets reported untruths as being a stone cold fact. Generally what happened was this. An event of some kind would occur. A few people would see it. One of those people would tell someone else, who would tell someone else, who would tell someone else. Often what got reported had the gist of what happened, but details then got added that made the story less than factual.
That is what Henry was referring to. In those cases, wording of the story is very important in my opinion. It is a lot more responsible to write “sources told us that” than this definitely happened exactly the way I am writing it. There are definitely times when using the latter approach will be prudent, but that isn’t always the case and when people involved in the “story” being reported on see untruths written about them, they will feel like Bruce feels on the subject. I understand his position.
Another example of that is when a story comes from one person. Often, a slanted version of the events is relayed because, well, it helps that person's narrative and position. If they can make someone else look bad, then they could look good. It's the reason every good reporter needs to multi-source stories.
You can send us questions for the PWInsider.com Q and A at pwinsider@gmail.com.
If you enjoy PWInsider.com you can check out the AD-FREE PWInsider Elite section, which features exclusive audio updates, news, our critically acclaimed podcasts, interviews and more by clicking here!
Bang On Casino
