information on MMA, the url is http://www.ultimatefightingforumz.com

. I am not sure you guy have videos yet on this blog for MMA, but I

would love to help out and provide some for you. My webmaster

compiled a bunch of video feeds from youtube and other sources, that

would benefit this blog as well, if you are interested. Thanks again

and have a great day!

I’m assuming your not referring to the actual business (of real fights versus staged ones). That said, the WWE does not give Meltzer any access, they do not talk to him on record, and they would really really rather he not write about them at all.

The UFC on the other hand, gives Meltzer alot of access, on the record, they cooperate with him, and have no issues with him, and provide him with lots of info openly.

The WWE, fires employees on suspicion that they have communicated with Meltzer and forbids talent from talking to Meltzer (which many do anyway off the record, or on have their names witheld or choose to be anoyomous).

Meltzer can get a press pass from the UFC and provide coverage, the WWE would hit Meltzer with a truck before inviting him to anything press related.

What is the key difference between the UFC and the WWE?

Matthew: Dave Meltzer probably doesn’t want to mess up things with Zuffa and other companies given that he needs his connections for insider news. That’s probably why he isn’t as critical of MMA business practices as Zach Arnold is (who has less to lose for criticizing Zuffa, ProElite, FEG, etc.)”

By that notion he also doesn’t want to mess up things with wrestling companies… oh wait. Aren’t journalists of his type essentially blackballed from WWE due to the large amount of criticism? Has that dried up any of his WWE sources?

That’s his bottom line take on this, but
you left this out of your initial post. So yes, you were cherry picking.

What is off about what Dave said? Where is it construed that he didn\’t assert the unethical nature of the Ferrell story? I\’m legitimately confused. He seems to say that all of the items he lists are indeed always considered unethical and I don\’t see a lot of wiggle room for alternative interpretations.

Is what you want is for him to take a harder and more assertive and prominent response to this item? This is a position I can understand, but it is not apparent in the initial post…

As for whether or not Dave Meltzer is endorsing or not endorsing the actions… to me, as a writer, there are some things that are clear-cut, black-and-white. Not every issue, mind you, but certainly some that should be clear-cut… such as the issue of mafia involvement in the business, money laundering, drug usage, and buying-and-paying off the media for favorable coverage.

If this was professional wrestling, I could understand the mentality of some gray area on these issues… but this is supposed to be a business based on real-fighting (even if you use pro-wrestling style marketing to hype it up) and supposedly legitimate thoughts from writers on events that transpire. (I don’t want to see commenters jump in again with the tired ‘there’s no journalism in MMA’ line, as I would hope someone… anyone… would aspire to higher standards than the ones currently being used.)

For me personally, using the ‘it is what it is’ line of mentality when writing on an issue like paying off the media or fixing a fight is not acceptible. Either manipulating or fixing fights is right or wrong, it’s not “Well it happened before, so it shouldn’t be surprising.” Either paying off the media for coverage is right or wrong. It’s called taking a stance.