How do you feel about the CM Punk return story that wasn't true?
I don't feel anything about it towards the original reporter, Dave Meltzer. I don't know what was actually reported elsewhere, so it's not fair for me to comment. If he got the story wrong, he got it wrong. However, if he never actually said Punk was returning and people claimed that he did, he shouldn't be the one taking the blame and I'll explain why.
Over the years, I've seen a lot of my own comments (written and verbal on Elite audio) get misconstrued and presented as complete lies elsewhere. Here's an example. I once said that there were some people who were "really behind Aksana" and liked her work in WWE. That is true. However, that was then turned into a million and one stories online that AKSANA TO RECEIVE BIG PUSH, which was never, ever anything close to what I was saying. I was just talking about her in a conversation about her work on an episode of a WWE TV show, not delivering breaking news or revealing any sort of plan for her. But, all those websites that went with the AKSANA TO RECEIVE story were quick to credit me and/or PWInsider as the source...which we were not. It was a story they falsified by shifting my words...while claiming it originated with me.
Since the majority of people complaining about the Punk thing were angry seemed to be based on what they were told second-hand, their issues should have been with the people who misconstrued whatever the original story was. They should also be mad at themselves for reading lame, secondary websites that don't have the sources or work ethic needed to create their own originally sourced material and have to rely on made up, miscredited or re-written information.
We received a lot of email asking why we weren't reporting the Punk story at the time. There was a reason we didn't - when we asked around with our sources, we were told there was nothing to it. It is not our policy to run around and correct others' reports, so there was nothing to write about. When there is something to write about and we properly confirm it with multiple sources, we will report it.
Just out of pure curiosity why aren't the "WWF" references and logo's from the attitude era for the network blurred out? Or in the case of a announcer or performer saying 'WWF" left in? I never was able to have a good understanding of that.
As we've covered here numerous times, WWE came to a settlement with the World Wildlife Fund (translation: paid a lot of money) so that they can utilize their archival footage uncensored and unedited, once plans for the Network became a reality. WWE can utilize the letters and names in archived footage but not promote that footage as WWF. So, if they want to release say Wrestlemania 7 on DVD, the packaging has to say WWE Wrestlemania 7 but the actual show can refer to itself as WWF, as it did in 1991 when it took place.
Do you know if they'll add a feature to continue from where you stopped watching ie Netflix and dvr's? It's annoying you have to restart everything. Also, when are these original series starting? Will they be adding more recent raws or smackdowns to the archive?
I think the resuming depends on your streaming device. On Roku, I am able to resume about a minute before I stopped when I turn off a stream of a show. It may be different from other devices. The original series have already started - Wrestlemania Rewind and WWE Countdown are already there. There is a window WWE has to wait before they can put up Raws and Smackdown, due to their NBC deal, but eventually, that material will be up there.
All of the talk about the WWE had me thinking: who do you see as the next inductee into the TNA Hall of Fame? The two biggest potential candidates in Jeff Jarrett and AJ Styles just left the company with no sign of coming back. Honestly, JB deserves a nod.
Jeff Jarrett should have been the first person inducted. Honestly, the next person inducted should be Bob Carter. He's the reason TNA has been around as long as it has, so why not honor him?
Hypothetical question here. Do you think WWE would ever be willing to work out a deal to allow other companies to use their footage. Granted, it would have to work out well financially for WWE. But, say TNA wanted to do a retrospective documentary about Chris Daniels and when discussing his WCW run wanted to use footage of that infamous scene of Daniels falling on his head during that moonsault or Scott Steiner beating him up - do you think WWE would ever allow a deal to be worked out? They own the wrestling history, that's an extra way to monetize it.
I really don't see it happening, but it's possible. They did license Brock Lesnar footage to UFC when Lesnar came to that company for use in commercials, so it's quite possible. I think you have to take that on a case by case basis. They have provided material to documentaries they weren't involved in before - like Lipstick and Dynamite.
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, right now for THREE DAYS free by clicking here!