Who do you like most: Bill Apter or Dave Meltzer

[Psykohurricane55]

I kinda wanted to do a thread about this for a long time but wasn't sure how it would be receive.

Now the point of this thread is to find out which journalist is the most respected by the IWC and wrestling fans in general. The point is not to discredit anything both man have done as Journalist over the year as they're careers as been long and are well respected within the wrestling community.

Personally, i tend to go more toward Apter, mostly because i've been following wrestling since i was a kid in the 80's and i was reading those apter magazine to get more info on what's going on within the wrestling business. I always thought that Apter never tried to published false info in his magazine and always verified the his facts before publishing it in one of his magazine. Also i never felt like he was trying to impose is opinion on the wrestling fans and never played favorite with any of the promotions he was covering.

Compare to Meltzer which while he's really good, i always got this feeling that he's not always publishing the truth in his newsletter and the fact that he does show favoritism to certain company because he like that style of wrestling more then another always kinda made not like him as much.

In the end, that's my point of view on this subject and maybe that not the point of view of everybody. So who is your favorite writer, Meltzer or Apter?

 

[sikkbones]

The apter mags are known for being a work of fiction and publishing fake interview's. The only reason they weren't sued by Vince or turner or Crockett is because they advanced storylines and often came out so late after the events it didn't matter.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

Apter has always been more about kayfabe whereas Meltzer has always been more about exposing the inner workings of pro wrestling and what goes on behind the scenes.

As a whole, I don't really pay too much attention to wrestling journalists, never really did even as a kid. If I did, I'd probably be more of an Apter fan as Dave Meltzer is very much concerned with pushing his own agenda as to what he thinks is good wrestling and passes it off as gospel.

 

[Cena Is A Punk Rocker]

I enjoy Meltzer. I find him and Bryan Alvarez entertaining. I enjoy their site. That said, I look at it as strictly entertainment. I don't look at their word as "gospel"

 

[Bagpipes]

At least Apter is somewhat level headed about professional wrestling being a business and a form of entertainment and goes about his career accordingly, attempting to better the business in some small way.

Meltzer, Alvarez, Satin, etc. simply put are marks who take this stuff WAY too seriously. How people pay money to hear them talk about fake fighting like it's a serious sporting contest is baffling to me.

We all love pro wrestling, some more so than others, but at the end of the day, it's a television show, a movie, a never ending fairy tale, so Meltzer giving a match 2 stars or 5 stars is pretty laughable when people take it as anything more than his own opinion or level of enjoyment for said match.

 

[Woodstuff]

I don't really pay attention to either, but I voted Apter purely because of how much Meltzer/Alvarez irritate me. I do catch the odd snippet of Meltzer's podcast on YouTube and my god, this guy is the king of dumbass smarks.

Him talking about the Enzo Amore heel turn on Raw last night is a perfect example of him pushing his opinion as fact (as others have said). An unbiased commenter would've likely spoke on how Enzo brings new levels of interest to the generic flippy Cruiserweight division, but nope, Meltzer chose to focus on how Enzo was "burying" the entire division (like a fking bad guy), wasn't getting "Stone COld level pops", and the whole thing was apparently the worst CW segment ever.

Dude should stick to making up news stories and leave the analysis/commentary to people that actually have a clue what they're talking about. Stone Cold should've been a 3rd option in this poll. His podcast stands head and shoulders above all others in terms of educated opinion and unbiased reviews.

 

[tdmoon]

Apter gets my vote here.

Bill Apter and the Weston magazines are a big part of what made me such an avid wrestling fan. The magazines have been criticized for sticking with kayfabe but I think that's a little unwarranted. They did provide real news about wrestlers who were moving, hurt, etc. and I always thought they made it pretty obvious what was real and what were just angles. Even as a young kid I found it easy to read between the lines and separate fact from fiction. Also, Apter comes across as so enthusiastic and just plain nice that it's hard not to like him. He genuinely seems to love professional wrestling.

 

[stingray11214]

Apter. Most of my info came the way of the "Apter Mags" back in the day. I love The Wrestler and PWI, and I was a fan of his 1wrestling.com site for a long time. He comes off as a reporter and protector of kayfabe. And, in that, he has never wavered.

Meltzer was a protector of the business. That is how he lasted for almost a half century. The only reason why he does what he does to WWE is that VKM blocked Meltzer access after his trial. So, Meltzer has ZERO reason to protect kayfabe in WWE because VKM does not respect it, either.

 

[ABMorales787]

I don't really pay attention to either, but I voted Apter purely because of how much Meltzer/Alvarez irritate me. I do catch the odd snippet of Meltzer's podcast on YouTube and my god, this guy is the king of dumbass smarks.

Him talking about the Enzo Amore heel turn on Raw last night is a perfect example of him pushing his opinion as fact (as others have said). An unbiased commenter would've likely spoke on how Enzo brings new levels of interest to the generic flippy Cruiserweight division, but nope, Meltzer chose to focus on how Enzo was "burying" the entire division (like a fking bad guy), wasn't getting "Stone COld level pops", and the whole thing was apparently the worst CW segment ever.

Dude should stick to making up news stories and leave the analysis/commentary to people that actually have a clue what they're talking about. Stone Cold should've been a 3rd option in this poll. His podcast stands head and shoulders above all others in terms of educated opinion and unbiased reviews.

Yeah. I mean it's not like he's been doing this for 30 years or something. It's not like wrestlers constantly go to him for opinions and other concerns. Yeah. He clearly doesn't know what he's on about.

Also, funny that he says Enzo burries the division, then a day later the Nielsen Ratings report that well over half a million tuned out of the segment. But nah, he don't know his stuff. Clearly. Smackdown and 205 drew less than 3000 this week, but nah. Enzo is a draw. That there Meltz don't know what he on about.

An unbiased opinion does not exist. Under any circumstance. Ever. There is always something in your head that pushes you to have an opinion in the first place and there is always a message that you want to get across. There's a level of biased to that.

I'm a wrestling journalist for wrestling in Puerto Rico...... well, before tragedy struck anyway. What Meltzer does, works. If your word is strong enough, the people that work the business do in fact reflect on your opinion and gives them a sense of conscience about the viewer looking in. Behind or away from the curtain. Maybe you don't like his work, but you have to be an utter fool to think he's a "dumbass".

While I respect Apter, Meltzer and Alvarez are what I've modeled my work on and I've seen the fruit of the labor, so I gotta go with Big Dave.