« Bobby Lashley squashes jaybrone in 24 seconds in Canada | Home | K-1 5/16 Amsterdam Arena card »
The mainstream media coverage of UFC
By Zach Arnold | May 16, 2009
Is the media ignorant or intentionally misrepresenting facts about UFC?:
We’ve seen CBS and CNBC and other big networks portray UFC in a manner which isn’t entirely true. And every time we watch these shows, it becomes more and more painful to watch the media profiles of White and UFC management. Again, that’s not the fault of UFC — they’re doing their job, but the media isn’t doing its job in telling the complete story. Unfortunately, ESPN has been one of the biggest culprits of journalistic malpractice in terms of covering the full picture on who Dana White is and how he operates.
…
As we mentioned earlier in this column, Dana White is often known as BLAF (Built Like a Fighter) online because of his persona as a tough man who is one of the boys and once did a fitness magazine cover (while challenging Tito Ortiz to an exhibition fight). In his ESPN the Magazine piece, Woods wrote, “White is respected in the fight world because he’s a former fighter and looks like one.”
Update (5/16): Someone please give me a download link for this Michael Woods interview. I have got to hear if he was challenged on some of the ridiculous statements he wrote in his ESPN article about Dana White.
Topics: Media, MMA, UFC, Zach Arnold | 52 Comments » | Permalink | Trackback |
There seems to be a general back and forth on the net about ESPN and the influence from the UFC. They seem to be pretty even handed overall, though, having given time to Couture when he announced his attempted resignation and Tito prior to UFC 84. I also expect little of the network that ran the Spike Lee directed Kobe Bryant infomercial when it comes to biopics about people who aren’t dead, so I guess that affects my view of it too.
I dunno. If I want to see legitimately good journalists do something on MMA I’ll wait for Real Sports to give a shit.
I don’t get my MMA news from Yahoo, CBS, ESPN etc. because I know they don’t do thier research nor do they ever present a balanced fact-based article. I vote for – media is voluntarily ignorant.
The same applies with nearly everything you get from mainstream news sources for any aspect of life. Mainstream news is filtered and will never be accurate. Just compare how politics is covered against what’s actually happening and you may begin to scratch the surface of what I mean.
Probably not in the best interests of ESPN speaking too negatively about the UFC when it’s likely they will be the front runners for cable television rights once SpikeTV’s contract runs out.
Speaking of the devil…
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/blog/index?entryID=4165901&name=rafael_dan
Dan Rafael talks BIZ. Turns out Pac/Hatton is already at 825K and going up, probably over 850K. Not bad. Better than I thought going in, for sure. Interestingly, he also gives a different number than the old estimated figure for Floyd/Hatton: 915K. I had seen it in USA Today before but that’s the first time the number has been attributed for something other than an off the cuff remark from Arum.
My vote is simple ignorance.
I’ve been watching MMA since the late 90’s, but I’ll be the first to admit I never knew the extent of the Zuffa Myth until I read about it here.
Do people really think producers and reporters who barely pay attention to the sport will have this knowledge (that which even many hardcore fans do not)?
Assume the media is completely ignorant, then it narrows the question.
Why does Dana White continually tell any reporter who will listen and repeatedly feel the need to take credit for writing rules for the sport, when he had nothing to do with that?
The mainstream media has improved dramatically in it’s coverage of MMA.
Not so many years ago you’d read a magazine or newspaper article describing the UFC with the phrase (and this is a paraphrase I’m sure but it’s pretty close) “It’s a no-holds-barred street fight that combines kickboxing with biting!” I can’t remember which magazine I read this quote in, but I’ve never forgotten the absurdity of the sentence.
Phil Mushnick decrying it as a barbaric sport where the participants bloody each other with bare fists…and on the opposite page there is a picture with two UFC fighters…wearing gloves.
Now that there is money in covering the sport, the mainstream is *actually* covering it. Not just stupid morality tales, but actual analysis and thoughtful perspective. It’s often crap, as is most writing, but you have to give them credit for trying.
Having said that, as a fan I come here and to Sherdog for coverage. When people who actually give a crap about something are covering it, it shows.
Well, now that the media are starting to recognize the sport and try to cover it, they should do some basic fact checking and background research like they would for any other type of story.
For example, reporters wouldnt allow a boxing promoter to say he wrote the rules for the sport if he didnt and say he was a former fighter if he was not.
Finally saw the Dana White piece in its entirety.
That was the first time I had heard the story of White leaving Boston after being the subject of a Whitey Bulger shakedown. Has that one been told much before?
Mainstream coverage of MMA is to some extent based in ignorance as well as the pre-determined ideas a lot of these so-called “journalists” have towards it.
What I find interesting is that a lot of these non-athlete, crotch-grabbing suits cut on MMA and get on their moral soapbox over it, but at the same time extol boxing and other hard-hitting sports as somehow acceptable.
Phil Mushnick by the way is an ignorant, trash journalist with a selective morality. He is your perfect example.
Has Dana ever said he actually wrote the unified rules, or does he just take credit for implementing them?
No one can take credit for “implementing” the unified rules other than the AC’s who passed them and required organizations to follow them in order to get sanctioned.
He can take credit for following them, but that’s rather hollow given that it’s a non-starter for those who don’t.
That does not answer my question: has Dana ever claimed to have written the Unified Rules?
Well, reporters aren’t experts. I would never turn to any newspaper be it the NYT the Financial Times, or any other corporate media for expert opinion.
If you want real analysis, real expert opinion you’re not going to get it in the public sector where popularity, private interest, deadlines, selective hiring standards, editing standards and word limits define what will be written.
yes, Dana has said many times that pre his involvement with the UFC, the sport of MMA had was no holds barred and he implemented rules for the sport and added weight classes.
to verify, simple google the words zuffa myth and see for yourself.
Dana did have an amateur boxing career. Granted, when you read that you would assume they mean in MMA, but calling him a former fighter isn’t an outrageous claim.
What makes it a “career?” I’ve heard him give two differing records for his alleged amateur boxing career. One time he claimed to have had 18 amateur fights and the other time I saw him claim 20.
Since I know he has given at least two differing records, I have my doubts.
Also, I had over well over 20 amateur boxing matches before I was 14 years old. It’s not that big of a deal, and I wouldn’t ever dream of bringing up in real life a bunch of local-level amateur fights. I had several national-level and two international amateur bouts and people I’m around these days have no idea.
The media’s stories about Dana are like the Chuck Norris Facts site
Zach, you should to the exact opposite of what mmajunkie did. Ufcopinion sounds more like it. Jesus, WTF happened to this place? Yu sold out or what?
^ drunk posting?
I am laughing right now. A much-needed chuckle to end the night.
“I vote for – media is voluntarily ignorant.”
Possibly, but this is still a conscious decision. Y
They either have actual knowledge, or they deliberately put their head in the sand (in which case knowledge is imputed)– the decision is intentional.
Nice article Zach.
Rob, you are too much. This kind of attitude is how nonsense conspiracy theories start.
How can reporters be “voluntarily ignorant” if there’s no reason for them to know the Zuffa Myth is false? The Zuffa Myth has been mistakenly repeated enough by almost every reputable news source out there. It has, unfortunately, taken a life of its own.
Are you suggesting that every reporter has a duty to investigate every single facet of every single reputed piece of UFC and MMA history every time they write a puff piece about the UFC or Dana White?
Part of the issue here is the lack of journalists in sports that know much or understand MMA in any sort of depth. But then again, that’s why its a fringe sport.
On that note, it seems that things are shifting now among the bloggistas that journalists will learn and accept MMA over time (hasn’t really happened thus far) to journalists becoming obsolete in a world of Sherdoggian forum speak and copypasta articles. I tend to think there will be some disappointment again.
Dan Rafael reports that Pacquiao vs Hatton did 825-850 k PPV buys. I guess Arum is even worse with the numbers than Dana is. 🙂
^ Wasn’t he throwing around figures like 2-2.5 million?
Someone noticed soon after that the quotes attributed to Arum were exactly the same ones given for the Pacquiao/De La Hoya bout.
Well, Grape Knee, we should test this out. Lets forward Nick Lembo’s press release he drafted on NJSACB letterhead a few years back, and forward it to ESPN. Surely, when the correct information is received, they will issue a correction, and we will never see this error again.
Right?
I think this as indicator of how miansteam outlets still don’t take the sport seriously. So they put in a minimal amount of time and effort to check their facts.
Hasn’t anybody heard of Hype?
A mythology can be as valuable as a dry fact, or even more so when it comes to drumming up enthusiasm and instigating growth.
I dont have a problem with an exaggeration here or there.
In fact it makes it easier to spot who the hardcore fans are and who heard about MMA by reading espn.
I think the mainstream media does as bad of a job coverin the UFC as the devoted MMA press does at covering the smaller shows. Both allow each to get away with big issues.
The UFC never gets much attention for how they handled the Jon Fitch situation. Nor do try cover it beyond superficial levels.
Same goes for the smaller organizations. Affliction gets way too much press for 2 shows. Strikeforce just let multiple fighters not make weight for the ShoMMA event, andnobody seems to care. And Bellator has allowed multiple fighters not make weight in a title tournament, and let them continue.
I will remotely care about the main stream press, if (and that’s a huge if, the regular MMA guys get their act together. Until then, it’s silly for us to expect the
Main stream to be better at the topic then the guys who cover it for a living…
Surely, when the correct information is received, they will issue a correction, and we will never see this error again.
You’re making the incorrect assumption that anyone outside of hardcore MMA fans even cares about this issue. They don’t. You need to give a valid reason why ESPN (or any other major new outlet) would or should even care about this information.
A promoter exaggerating his own importance and success? Get out of town! That never happens!
You people will use any excuse to work yourselves up into a froth of righteous, indignant rage and conspiracy theories. Wild conspiracy theories will only make you less credible in the long run.
Grape Knee,
Again–this wasn’t the promoter doing the exagerrating. This was ESPN doing the narration.
You see no distinction?
—
And what is the conspiracy of which you speak? Conspiracy involves a plan amongst “co-conspirators.”
That isn’t what I believe is happening at all. I believe certain elements in the media are making conscious decisions on their own accord.
So did Nick Lembo fly to Canada and fight for the Unified rules? What was the first promotion to use the unified rules and how much influence has that promotion had on American MMA as a whole?( I know the UFC used them soon after being formulated but seriously,was there another promotion before them?) How much money do Nick Lembo and the other American promotions spend lobbying state legislators and athletic commissions to legalize MMA and thus adopt the Unified Rules?
You people obsess over minutia and expect ESPN to do the same. In any major sport or really anywhere in life there are going to be people who are the first true inventor of something but it is the the person that popularizes or brings the movement to a wide range of people that will get credit; in this case that is Dana and the UFC.
The fact that the Unified rules and the UFC’s use of them predates DANA and co. is really only a worth while point to the most obsessive type of super fight nerd. If Dana and co. had fought tooth and nail against them and had refused to continue using them its not hard to imagine that the rules would have never gotten the traction they in fact did.
Basically, you are hung up on a technicality, that technically someone else wrote the rules so really Dana should not get ANY credit for advancing them or the sport.
Spacedog…I believe the correct answer is the IFC for a show in NJ.
Of course, there is a distinction. But it is irrelevant and you are ignoring the real issue.
1) ESPN doesn’t even realize that the Zuffa Myth is false. Why would they question something they don’t realize to be false?
2) Even if they did realize it was false, you still haven’t answered the question why they would/should care.
Point 1 I have answered already I believe.
Point 2–because if they are presenting a story as journalism, they have a duty to accurately report facts, for the simplistic version.
Or, to put the point another way, if it is so inconsequential and meaningless, why does Zuffa continue to perpetuate it?
Spacedog and Grape Knee just obviously want to ignore the truth and the facts, or cannot understand the issues, or are Dana White nuthuggers. The point is that the NJ Commission wrote the rules and thatLembo’s correction letter cited Quebec and California’s important roles early on. Also mentioned was the fact that the UFC itself was far from no holds barred at that time, having its own Mixed Martial Arts Council headed by Jeff Blatnick which had already instituted rules such as round and fight lengths and weight classes. So the question remains, why does Dana White try to take credit for something that he had absolutely nothing to do with, and why nuthuggers still are trying to defend Dana on this simple to understand myth.
Spacedog, Lembo is not a promoter and as an athletic commissioner doesn’t spend money to get promotions to use the unified rules
Really? Nick lembo is not a promoter? I never knew that. My goodness, next you’ll be telling me the earth is really round.
I am not a nut hugger in any way, shape , or form. I think Dana is a dick and wish he would shut the hell up.
But you all miss my point as I knew you would. You may not like it but the UFC is the most important promotion in the history of MMA. THey came first and have always been the largest in America. Dana was at the helm when they became the face of global (or at least N. American) MMA. It is not reasonable to deny the importance of his work with the athletic commissioners and Zuffa’s early and aggressive use of the Unified Rules.
But don’t let me get in the way of blind hate, you can always just call me a “nut huger.”
p.s. For a bonus, who implemented the triangle offense in basketball? (only take 5 seconds to answer)
Spacedog,
I have no issue with what you wrote above. None at all. I must say, though, I do not see the relevance of that to this conversation.
The relevance is that people are getting their knickers so twisted over the “Zuffa myth” and in doing so are flat out denying the very real connection between Zuffa (and Dana), the advancement of MM, and by extension and advancement of the Unified Rules.
The fact that ESPN did not flog the old school bloggers favorite horse is hardly an indictment of their reporting nor was their reporting really that inaccurate. In a technical sense it WAS inaccurate but in a more lay sense it was not. Zuffa is MMA, thus Zuffa is the unified rules, padded gloves, the octagon and so on.
Kind of like how Phil Jackson would be the answer to my question (about the triangle offense) although the offensive was almost certainly first run by someone else.
Thank you for the response. I see your point, but I disagree with certain aspects.
To answer an earlier question, by claiming itself the inventor of the rules, Zuffa already had a leg up on establishing another element of its public push–that the sport is ultimate fighting, and by extension, Zuffa and the UFC thereby invented it. Zach Arnold has far more background in this time period than I do, as does Ivan Trembow, Eddie Goldman, and others.
I must also pause to ask, if perpetuating a myth is no big deal, based upon the indpendent judgment of any given media outlet, then by extension I would ask, is it also fair to omit others with legitimate views and contributions, because likewise, the media outlet deems them inconsequential? I didn’t see either of these premises in the ethics standards I have reviewed for journalists, and as Zach noted in his article, it doesn’t take a journalism degree from Columbia to already intuitively come to this conclusion.
The “myths” are also unfair to those who put in legitimate efforts–it is necessarily discrediting the accomplishment and efforts of others. From a PR standpoint, it also further narrows the public focus away from the sport as a whole, and towards a singular promotion.
All of this is in addition to the basic role and responsibility of journalists, especially those with enormous platforms.
I apologize for the duel posts, but felt compelled to post the following. If I knew how to post a picture directly, I would have done so. Please look at the first picture in this thread, and keep in mind, at the time this poll was conducted, ESPN had a show already called MMA Live.
http://www.mixedmartialarts.com/?go=forum_framed.posts&forum=1&thread=1426258&page=1&pc=23
Rob, you are confusing the reality that the Zuffa Myth is false, with the assumption that ESPN and other news outlets either know (or care) that the Zuffa Myth is false.
You didn’t answer my question above, if they didn’t know the Zuffa Myth is false, how are they supposed to adequately question it? Are they supposed to comb MMA history for every possible falsehood for every supposed action in MMA history before writing a puff piece on MMA or the UFC? You did NOT answer this question earlier.
You are being unrealistic about most journalists capabilities, and the standard to which they are being held. You seem to think every article should be written to win the Pulitzer. They’re simply not. There are very few investigative journalists in general, and only a handful at all in sports journalism.
Eeeesh. You really believe the Zuffa Myth was a major factor in their success? I can only assume you’re being deliberately obtuse to win a pointless, minor argument about a pointless, minor topic. Good luck with your mindless, indignant blog-rage, sir!
No one here is saying Dana and the Ufc have not done great things for the sport.
But we are not nuthuggers like spacedog, that we, like spacedog, say that because Dana has done so much for the sport he can lie and make up anything else he wants and I will blindly and loyally stand by and defend him, well because he has done good for the sport.If Dana told Spacedog that he invented the Cheeseburger, Spacedog would argue with anyone who would research and find out that he really didn’t.
spacedog, this was a great analogy, but wasted on these folks. It’s obvious most of these guys don’t watch sports, they just watch MMA.
Grape:
You are correct, I am an MMA fan and jiu jitsu practitioner who has never watched a basketball game.
I watch every UFC and respect Dana White tremendously for what he has done.
So can’t you see that its upsetting to see him say he wrote rules that led the sport to more acceptance when he had absolutely zero to do with it. Shouldn’t the people who did work on them and allow the UFC and Dana to bring the sport where it is get a mention. Or should we just shut up and let history be re written and let Dana go down as the architect of something he wasn’t even around for.
Wonder if Phil Jackson goes around telling anyone who will cover him that he was the sole creator and inventor of that technique.
Doubt that he does.
Weak analogy
Grape Knee,
I believe I have answered that question. I do not believe they are unaware. When they air a show called MMA Live, but conduct a poll calling the sport “Ultimate Fighting”, I guess that too is just simple ignorance?
Perhaps I am overestimating their capabilities as you say–but I don’t think so, and that is no acceptable excuse even if true.
Rob: thanks for a real response.
Mike: Get a clue dude. I’m a grown man making a reasonable point about the nature of sport and who gets credit for what. Calling me a “nut hugger” because I’m not swilling the haterade just makes you an angry little twit.
Niko: It is an incomplete analogy I thought of going with Darwin/Wallace but figured it was too highbrow.
It was only really meant to make a point about media, reporting, and perception.
In any case my point has been pretty much missed by the blind hate that anyone who is not totally anti Zuffa gets. In an very important sense the Unified rules ARE linked to the UFC. If you can’t see why that is the case then I really don’t see what to say.
Responding to Rob about the true pioneers getting the short end of the stick, well yeah that sucks but I don’t really think it is the whole sale indictment of ESPN that Zack and other seem to. Lastly, I’ve never heard Dana claim he ACTUALLY WROTE the rules, I have heard him say things liek “we ran towards regulations” and “we put weight classes in and made the whole thing safer.” I guess technically that is slightly off but it really does not hose me the way his other antics do.
Anyway I’m done. Please refrain from calling me names.
A last question; do the NFL, MLB, ect. operate under the control of state athletic commissions? Just curious.