by Bob Morris

If there's one thing the wrestling world is sensitive to more than anything, it's criticism.

I think we all knew that based on the way Vince Russo reacts to our criticisms of him in the Delphi forums and on various websites, but it's not just guys like Russo who are sensitive to criticism. And it's not just Vince McMahon either, or those people who happen to work in the wrestling industry themselves.

It's the fans of wrestling that are also sensitive to any criticism.

Witness the reaction to a large number of wrestling fans to the criticism levied at wrestling by Brent Bozell and the Parents Television Council. The majority of the response I have seen to Bozell and company has been an emotionally-triggered response about what a bunch of jerks these people are, and how dare they try to tell us what we can and can't watch.

I read Alex Marvez's interview with Bozell at wrestlingobserver.com, and while I don't agree with everything Bozell has to say, he makes valid points. The problem is that, at times, Bozell can come off pretty harsh with his commentary (which likely can be attributed to the fact that he obviously believes in what he stands for), and as a result, many wrestling fans just snap at him and what he has to say.

But regardless, the man does make valid points, and they often get dismissed by many wrestling fans who respond emotionally because they feel they "gotta defend wrestling." Hell, wrestling fans do it to each other when somebody criticizes something he or she didn't like on a particular show, and gets chewed out because of that. But an emotionally triggered response to something, rather than something that's well thought out, often defeats the purpose of the point one is trying to make.

Some people would suggest that wrestling fans have been "conditioned" to become defensive of wrestling by the promoters. There is no question that Vince McMahon likes to instill "brand loyalty" into his viewers by getting them to watch WWF programming on a regular basis, and not any other wrestling promotion, and to believe that WWF "can do no wrong." But I think there's more to the way fans act when defending wrestling than just "conditioning."

To the long time wrestling fans (those of you who go back to the 1980s and earlier), ask yourself this: When did you feel comfortable talking about wrestling at the office, or at school, or just in any general conversation with people? Chances are most of you didn't feel comfortable doing that unless you knew the people you talked to also happened to like wrestling. And that's because it wasn't considered "cool" to be a wrestling fan.

Even during the days of Hulkamania and fans filling up the Pontiac Silverdome to watch Wrestlemania III, wrestling still wasn't a subject most fans would talk about outside of those who were wrestling fans. And that fact is no doubt a huge reason why wrestling became big on the Internet, because it allowed fans the opportunity to talk about their favorite promotion with others without feeling embarrassed about it.

But back to the point…you seldom, if ever, saw somebody wearing a Hulkamania T-shirt in public (unless it was a young child), even during the days when Hulk Hogan was the top draw in wrestling and receiving mainstream attention.

Today, however, it is common to see people wearing Austin 3:16 T-shirts or making reference to Rock's catch phrases in conversation. Heck, the nW o is no longer around, and I still see people wearing those T-shirts. In other words, wrestling, and the WWF in particular, is more mainstream than it ever has been before. Suddenly, it's OK to talk about it in conversation at the office or at school without feeling embarrassed.

And I think some fans out there are worried that, should a group like PTC have its way, that wrestling won't be mainstream anymore and that the fans will find themselves unable to freely talk about what they like to watch.

The truth is, at some point, wrestling is very likely to lose its mainstream appeal. The wrestling business has always been cyclical, and at some point, the boom ends. That doesn't mean the WWF is guaranteed to start losing money, for you can do good business without having a "boom." I don't see the WWF going from boom to bust in a matter of weeks, but its appeal may very well gradually dissolve, to the point where it's mostly the hardcore fan base that is still watching.

But the hardcore fan base is what keeps wrestling going, and that fan base is the reason why the WWF managed to survive, despite doing terrible business in 1995, and various scandals being slapped on them before that. WWF may not have been mainstream, but it still had years when it did respectable business and turned in a profit. Only when the WWF starts pissing off the hardcore fan base, without finding a way to build on to that, will the WWF ever be in financial trouble again.

Anyway, what I'm saying is that pro wrestling isn't going to disappear from the map just because the PTC is targeting Smackdown. Wrestling will carry on, so don't worry about the fact that your shows may be gone because PTC is busy getting advertisers to pull their sponsorship from WWF programs.

Which brings me to my next point: Some people seem to think PTC is "telling viewers what they can and can't watch." Not so. Bozell, in the Marvez interview, said he doesn't care if adults are watching the WWF. He just doesn't like the fact that children are watching and the WWF is encouraging them to watch by marketing to those children. True, Bozell's choice of words isn't a nice way of putting it, but that's what his point is.

I know…you all are saying that it's the parents' job to raise their kids, that the kids don't drive themselves to the arenas, adults buy toys, etc. I'm not saying any of that is wrong. What IS wrong is that the WWF, despite the fact its programming would be considered by some to be unsuitable for children, is STILL marketing to children anyway.

Take a look at South Park…I will not argue that there are children who watch the program, despite the fact it's a show some would consider unsuitable for children. However, have any of you ever seen a South Park doll sold at Toys R Us? I can't recall seeing any South Park merchandise sold at Toys R Us, aside from the video games, and even those have the rating label slapped on them.

In fact, a lot of the South Park merchandise I've seen sold in various novelty shops aimed at the young adult market has a message slapped on it that says "recommended for mature audiences." In other words, those who do marketing for South Park, despite the fact some children happen to watch it, aren't trying to pull those kids in.

But with WWF merchandise being set up in displays at toy stores, that's evidence that the WWF is going after the children, even when some people are saying that children shouldn't watch WWF programming. And that's sending the message that the WWF is "trying to have it both ways," and that opens the WWF to the criticism like from Bozell and the PTC.

Bozell adds that the PTC's main concern is programming which airs during the so-called "family hour," or at 8 p.m. Eastern, on network television. That's why the PTC doesn't concern itself with shows like NYPD Blue, which air at a later timeslot, or why it hasn't concerned itself with much of the cable programs (although that may change, as Bozell indicated to Meltzer that PTC would be looking at other wrestling programs besides Smackdown, and also at WCW programming). So the comparisons of Smackdown to NYPD Blue lose validity (not to mention that NYPD Blue isn't marketed to children, either).

And the way Vince McMahon and others with the WWF have responded adds to the problems the PTC has with the WWF. You all remember the "Get It?" campaign, don’t you? The one which essentially said that any critic who didn't find what was on WWF programs to be entertaining simply didn't "get it" and could easily be dismissed? I'd say it was a smart move for the WWF to drop that campaign, because it just smacks of insulting those who don't find the WWF entertaining. Hey, not everyone is going to find wrestling to be something they want to watch, so don't just dismiss people as "not getting it" because they don't see what's so great about it.

More recently, though, has been the way McMahon has chosen to respond to the PTC. Bozell said in the Marvez interview that he received a letter from McMahon to "go to hell" and that reeks of unprofessionalism on McMahon's part. True, Bozell's remarks at times can come off as unprofessional, but McMahon responding in kind doesn't solve the problem, it just adds to it.

A number of fans seem to have a problem with the PTC getting various advertisers to pull their ads from WWF programming. Like I said before, it's not gonna mean that wrestling is going to collapse just like that, but furthermore, if the WWF has advertisers lined up outside the doors of WWFE Towers, where does the problem lie?

And getting advertisers to pull ads from WWF program does NOT, in any shape or form, tell you as an adult viewer what you can and can't watch. You are still free to continue to watch WWF programming, whether or not MCI decides to advertise on Smackdown. And the advertisers don't have to listen to what PTC says either, and there's no way Bozell and Steve Allen are pointing guns at the executives and making threats to them. All they do is show clips from wrestling shows to make their point, and the executives made their decisions based on that.

And the WWF marketers aren't necessarily showing clips of the programs to potential advertisers. Typically, marketers show to get those ads are the Nielsen numbers which show the demographics for WWF viewers, and get the advertisers to buy ads based on them. And the numbers that the WWF pulls in are high, so naturally, advertisers will be attracted to that. I won't speculate on what else the WWF tells the advertisers, but it is safe to assume the marketers are showing the Nielsen numbers to them, because that's something advertisers take into consideration.

Back to the point…just because PTC is getting MCI and others to pull ads from Smackdown, it doesn't mean your right to watch Smackdown is being trampled on, Smackdown will continue to air as long as the ratings stay high.

As far as how to respond to the PTC, take a look at how Duane Johnson responded to Bozell on CNN. He came off very professional…true, Bozell may have just viewed Johnson's words as the typical response to him, but Johnson's words were chosen wisely and he came off looking good. Had Rock told Bozell to "go to hell," in those words exactly, then it would have been a different story.

And that is perhaps the biggest problem McMahon has…the way he responds to the PTC. Telling Bozell to "go to hell" is not professional, and it only serves to get Bozell and company to keep going after the WWF. A more well-thought approach by McMahon to Bozell may not have solved everything, but it would have been better for McMahon to use a bucket of water on the flames, instead of a can of gasoline, because you have a better chance of putting the flames out.

And McMahon would be well advised to remember that, the more public the WWF becomes, and the more attention it gets, the more careful McMahon must handle any response to criticism. Otherwise, the criticism will grow and it could give McMahon more headaches than he really wants to have.

And in particular, McMahon should seriously consider not marketing to children, even if it means losing out on potential dollars. If we are to believe what Bozell said in the Marvez interview, where out of seven million viewers, three million are under the age of 18, that still leaves four million viewers out there watching the shows, which is still a solid number that would allow the WWF to remain profitable. Even if children still happen to attend the shows, McMahon can reply that he's not trying to get their business if action figures aren't being sold at Toys R Us.

As for the wrestling fans who disagree with what Bozell has to say, it would be wise to reconsider how you respond to him and his fellow PTC members. You may think that it's showing Bozell that his tactics aren't nice, but by using those tactics yourself, you are stooping to the levels you claim Bozell to be at, and that defeats the purpose of the arguments you make.

Disagree with Bozell all you want…but don't be so quick to dismiss his points.