The Anti-TNA Idiocy Of Justin LaBar And Josh Isenberg

[Poop Master Flex]

Well the truth is LaBar and Isenberg have never been up on TNA from what I have seen so its no big surprise, they take a shot at TNA at least once every show.

Onto the comments made they DID say it could have fallen through the cracks and they didn't really know, I think they were just trying to make the point that its bad publicity to promise something to the fans and not deliver, which is true. I know if I ordered Victory Road, saw that travesty, got a promise from TNA that they would give me something and didn't deliver I might be turned off from ordering their PPV's because they are basically saying "We gave you crap, now we are gonna slap you in the face for good measure".

Note that doesn't mean that's what TNA did, since this is really the only time i have heard anything about this and its been 2-3 months already. Truthfully they don't get alot of PPV buys as it is so it would be in their best interest to keep the fans that actually PAY to watch a TNA PPV. It certainly isn't earth shattering and really there is no merit to what was said, it was a good point but its hard to believe a story when only 1 fan out of 10,000 speaks up.

I look at it as CSR has really only ever been a WWE show for the most part, I don't think I usually ever hear much about TNA on that show but its obvious both just don't care for the TNA product. I like the show myself but they do post pretty much ANY story they can get no matter how big or small. You got to remember though they gotta fill 40 minutes every week and talk about the latest news in wrestling, if thats the case you will pick up any story you can.

I will say they didn't come out and make it sound like it was legit news, they were just making a valid point that its not a good idea to piss off fans especially when you don't have a lot that will buy PPV's as it is. They did say it could be an isolated incident so I really don't see what the big deal is.

 

[Mindshatter]

I think you all need to look at their motivations here. Why would they invent an email to bash TNA? What would it gain them? We all know TNA is garbage in many areas and will always be 2nd to WWE. We also know that CSR is obviously based on the events and happenings of the WWE primarily so what possible motivation could they possibly have to do this?

 

[TheHitMark-SirJoseOle]

This is a sad, depressing thread where the majority of posters in it are the very definition of "IWC idiots". On CSR, they are not news reporters. To the best of my knowledge, Justin LaBar and Josh Isenberg have never claimed to be news reporters when it comes to CSR. CSR is not a news show. It has never claimed to be a news show. They are wrestling critics, like all of us on here. The difference is, they are more intelligent than many of the people complaining about them.

"Oooh, they are anti-TNA". So? TNA is awful at the moment. To the point why I don't understand how people can defend it. They are giving their opinion on TNA, just like everyone in this thread.

I'm going to contest your point on assuming that LaBar and Isenberg are more intelligent on the wrestling business than the posters on here? At least some of us are not saying something without backing it up, they're obviously unwilling to back up a point that they are trying to make. Why should I believe something they said without furnishing proof. What they are trying to say about TNA is pretty bold if they have no proof.

Again the snazzy outfits and the fact they're sitting at a desk talking about the world of wrestling leads me to think otherwise, what's next kid you going to tell me that WWE isn't wrestling even though they wear tights and run off ring ropes and perform wrestling maneuvers. It's obvious LaBar and Isenberg can't make up their minds as to what they are and you obviously can't tell for sure either. Oh and I am not sure if you missed this either but their videos are posted on the news headlines of wrestlezone.com so if they are not news reporters they better let wrestlezone know about it, don't ya think?

Please...

 

[Daniel]

I'm going to contest your point on assuming that LaBar and Isenberg are more intelligent on the wrestling business than the posters on here? At least some of us are not saying something without backing it up, they're obviously unwilling to back up a point that they are trying to make. Why should I believe something they said without furnishing proof. What they are trying to say about TNA is pretty bold if they have no proof.

Ironically, in your OP, you don't really back up your criticism of LaBar and Isenberg. You say that you've always been treated well by TNA. That's your reasoning. And it's not good enough evidence for you to defend TNA on this issue.

And it's not what they're saying. It's what this e-mailer is saying. There is a difference.

Again the snazzy outfits and the table they're sitting at a desk talking about the world of wrestling leads me to think otherwise, what's next kid you going to tell me that WWE isn't wrestling even though they wear tights and run off ring ropes and perform wrestling maneuvers. It's obvious LaBar and Isenberg can't make up their minds as to what they are and you obviously can't tell for sure either.

Please...

What are you talking about? You're not making any sense to me. They sit at a desk, sure. They're talking about wrestling, of course. But they're reviewing it and giving their take on it. They are not reporting it. That should be enough to tell you that they're NOT reporters and that they ARE critics.

 

[TheHitMark-SirJoseOle]

Ironically, in your OP, you don't really back up your criticism of LaBar and Isenberg. You say that you've always been treated well by TNA. That's your reasoning. And it's not good enough evidence for you to defend TNA on this issue.

And it's not what they're saying. It's what this e-mailer is saying. There is a difference.

What are you talking about? You're not making any sense to me. They sit at a desk, sure. They're talking about wrestling, of course. But they're reviewing it and giving their take on it. They are not reporting it. That should be enough to tell you that they're NOT reporters and that they ARE critics.

Yeah but where's the proof this "emailer" even exists, that's the part you seem to be missing...the way I look at it, their videos are being posted on the news page, along with other happenings in the wrestling business, and then they put "TNA Breaking Promises" in their video title. Sure sounds like news reporting to me, if they said they got some information about a fan "emailing" them about TNA. You see the thing is I can show you the evidence that TNA has been a business of their word in my dealings with them, but LaBar and Isenberg won't show us the email that they supposedly received. We're just supposed to believe that TNA is breaking their promises to wrestling fans without proof. And then you're going to tell me that by them mentioning this that this is not news reporting, get the hell out of here!

Sounds like you're the one having the comprehension problems kid. Personally I'll go back and forth with you on this point, probably to the point where you'll tell me that I'm out of my mind over it, but I don't care really, I'm just telling you like it is. LaBar and Isenberg reported "something" about TNA and have chosen not to back it up. Did you even watch the video is my main question.

 

[Daniel]

Thing is real critics also give positive reviews. These 2 are just running a absolute smear campaign.

No. Real critics speak their mind. To a real critic, it doesn't matter whether it is positive or negative. I'd go as far as to say that if you go out of your way to be balanced as a critic, you're not a very good critic.

A smear campaign? Really? A smear campaign takes place because someone has something to gain from smearing their opponent. LaBar and Isenberg are not using propaganda, yellow journalism or knowingly lying. LaBar and Isenberg have nothing to gain from reporting this about TNA. And TNA are certainly not CSR's opponent. So no, it's not a smear campaign.

 

[yoshi_doce2006]

This is a sad, depressing thread where the majority of posters in it are the very definition of "IWC idiots". On CSR, they are not news reporters. To the best of my knowledge, Justin LaBar and Josh Isenberg have never claimed to be news reporters when it comes to CSR. CSR is not a news show. It has never claimed to be a news show. They are wrestling critics, like all of us on here. The difference is, they are more intelligent than many of the people complaining about them.

"Oooh, they are anti-TNA". So? TNA is awful at the moment. To the point why I don't understand how people can defend it. They are giving their opinion on TNA, just like everyone in this thread.

Yet WWE has been awful for a few years and I dont know how anyone can defend it. And Ring of Honor has had a great regional following but not much of a national following, meaning it has been unable to cross the line into mainstream successfully yet people continue to defend it. It's all about what the person likes. TNA gets over a million viewers weekly and many more DVR it so someone, somewhere in the United States must like it. If people like it, they will defend it. Simple.

 

[harrythem]

Hang on there SirJose. Saying that because they're posted on the news section means they're reporting news is incorrect. All opinion columns and videos are posted on the main news section, and they're also in the subsections at the bottom. Putting them straight in there, instead of having them in the news section that you see straight away when you visit the page, would lower the views and, in my opinion, result in a lot of people missing out on a lot of interesting articles.

As for the email? Could've been real, could not. I tend to believe it was, but I'd say it was the exception, not the norm. They have a strong pro-WWE slant and come across as a pair of tools but, honestly, they're about as bothersome as a fart in a field.

I've dealt with both TNA & WWE merchandise and, personally, the postage costs are the only issue I really had with TNA (it was over the top for what I ordered) and the fact that there isn't much cool choice that their roster deserves.

 

[jholcomb22]

SirJOseOle, it seems like as long as they had shown you exactly what they said in email form, you would stop your bitch fit. So if Isenberg has sent LaBar the email and they blacked out the "emailer" information, but they showed it to you, you would accept it?

 

[MB1025]

Ironically, in your OP, you don't really back up your criticism of LaBar and Isenberg. You say that you've always been treated well by TNA. That's your reasoning. And it's not good enough evidence for you to defend TNA on this issue.

And it's not what they're saying. It's what this e-mailer is saying. There is a difference.


What are you talking about? You're not making any sense to me. They sit at a desk, sure. They're talking about wrestling, of course. But they're reviewing it and giving their take on it. They are not reporting it. That should be enough to tell you that they're NOT reporters and that they ARE critics.

The bottom line is this. They don't cover a TNA topic unless it supports their opinion. It just happens their opinion is 100 percent negative about the company. It is not even debatable how bad that looks especially when every show they go out of their way to take jabs at TNA.

They are definitely reporting the news because just about ever show they talk about dirt sheet stuff from this site and discuss it. You actually have to report news before you can have a discussion on it or they wouldn't have a show.

Finally even if their was a person who sent in the email who is to say the email is even true? I have seen a few times WZ has posted TNA Live Event emails from posters that are 100 percent completely untrue from the majority of the other live event reports from other sites.

IMO if they are part of this site and feel the need to report and be critics then you have to be fair and logical about it. If you don't want to cover TNA that is fine. However don't just pick and choose what to report so it helps your argument and so you can poke a little fun. Especially when you are part of one of the more popular wrestling websites on the internet.

 

[TheHitMark-SirJoseOle]

Hang on there SirJose. Saying that because they're posted on the news section means they're reporting news is incorrect. All opinion columns and videos are posted on the main news section, and they're also in the subsections at the bottom. Putting them straight in there, instead of having them in the news section that you see straight away when you visit the page, would lower the views and, in my opinion, result in a lot of people missing out on a lot of interesting articles.

As for the email? Could've been real, could not. I tend to believe it was, but I'd say it was the exception, not the norm. They have a strong pro-WWE slant and come across as a pair of tools but, honestly, they're about as bothersome as a fart in a field.

I've dealt with both TNA & WWE merchandise and, personally, the postage costs are the only issue I really had with TNA (it was over the top for what I ordered) and the fact that there isn't much cool choice that their roster deserves.

Well it should be labeled a heck of a lot better, I am just saying, "LATEST WWE AND TNA NEWS" is what it says above the links, therefore that leads me to believe that those said links are news. I am just saying. I might come across as standoffish, unlikable and condescending to several posters, but I don't care I am constructing a counterpoint to something that I feel strongly about. LaBar and Isenberg said something about TNA that sounded like a newsbit to me, they said a fan emailed them in regards to TNA supposedly swindling them but yet they are offering no proof of such a thing, why bother saying anything in the first place if you're only out there to give an overview of wrestling?

I'm just saying man, I'm only going off of what I read on the main page.

 

[TheHitMark-SirJoseOle]

SirJOseOle, it seems like as long as they had shown you exactly what they said in email form, you would stop your bitch fit. So if Isenberg has sent LaBar the email and they blacked out the "emailer" information, but they showed it to you, you would accept it?

So the best you can come up with this the term "bitch fit" eh? Well asshole, yeah I would concede and not talk about the topic anymore if they could actually prove something, but the way I look at it, you bring something up you better be ready to back it up, I bet in real life you're probably a little bitch yourself that likes to talk the talk but won't walk the walk. I'd really watch what you say because I've got plenty of ammo and I don't mind using someone's own rounds against them too. Obviously you're a stupid asshole that will believe anything they're told.

 

[jholcomb22]

SirJoseOle, so you aren't even mad if they made the story up, as long as they showed you a bogus email? That makes no sense at all.
And oh my, you have me trembling at my computer screen thinking about all the harm you can do to me. You are nothing more than a tool when you make threats through an internet forum.

 

[Daniel]

Yeah but where's the proof this "emailer" even exists, that's the part you seem to be missing...

There isn't any proof the e-mailer exists. But why would they lie? What do they have to gain? If the e-mailer doesn't exist, then fine, I'm on your side. But there is a better chance that they do exist than not.

the way I look at it, their videos are being posted on the news page, along with other happenings in the wrestling business, and then they put "TNA Breaking Promises" in their video title. Sure sounds like news reporting to me, if they said they got some information about a fan "emailing" them about TNA.

Yes, the videos are posted on a news page. But so are editorials. Do you see them as news, too? If you watch CSR, it's painfully obvious that it isn't reporting. It's critique. Just like the editorials that they post.

You see the thing is I can show you the evidence that TNA has been a business of their word in my dealings with them, but LaBar and Isenberg won't show us the email that they supposedly received. We're just supposed to believe that TNA is breaking their promises to wrestling fans without proof. And then you're going to tell me that by them mentioning this that this is not news reporting, get the hell out of here!

Oh, Your business dealings with them. Oh, well colour me convinced! You're one person whose word is just as good as an anonymous e-mailer. What kind of proof do you want, anyway? You want them to show an e-mail? If they were lying (which they have no reason to, remember), they could have mocked up an e-mail. You want the e-mailer to show that TNA haven't made good on their promise? Tell me how they could show that and I'd be a bit more convinced.

Sounds like you're the one having the comprehension problems kid.

Really not. You're the one who can't comprehend that CSR isn't news reporting.

 

[MB1025]

No. Real critics speak their mind. To a real critic, it doesn't matter whether it is positive or negative. I'd go as far as to say that if you go out of your way to be balanced as a critic, you're not a very good critic.

A smear campaign? Really? A smear campaign takes place because someone has something to gain from smearing their opponent. LaBar and Isenberg are not using propaganda, yellow journalism or knowingly lying. LaBar and Isenberg have nothing to gain from reporting this about TNA. And TNA are certainly not CSR's opponent. So no, it's not a smear campaign.

That is not the point. The point is they don't give TNA the time of day and even go as far as to take jabs at the company during their shows. Then when something negative like an email or report hits their desk they decide to cover TNA because it supports their opinion. They cover WWE unbiasedly, but they don't for TNA. However you want to look at it is wrong. Either cover the good and the bad about TNA or don't cover it at all.

 

[TheHitMark-SirJoseOle]

SirJoseOle, so you aren't even mad if they made the story up, as long as they showed you a bogus email? That makes no sense at all.
And oh my, you have me trembling at my computer screen thinking about all the harm you can do to me. You are nothing more than a tool when you make threats through an internet forum.

I never said anything about a bogus email that's you putting words in my mouth you stupid fuck, and I never made a physical threat to you,I am just speaking figuratively idiot, you're the one that wanted to say I was making a bitch fit here on the boards, well you want to talk shit like that on this forum, I will turn around and fire right back with more points. You're the tool, get that straight. I never said anything about actually threatening you, there's a big difference so don't trying making out what I said to be bigger than it is.

You're the one who's the tool if you got a big enough ego to think I'd actually want to take this outside the internet forum. And again I never said anything about receiving a bogus email to satisfy my concerns. All I am saying is that if LaBar and Isenberg believe so strongly in raising awareness to TNA screwing over a fan, you think it would make more sense to educate the wrestling fan base on this site and provide some actual hard evidence of such a thing going on.

But yeah definitely don't toot your own horn, you're not that important but in the context of this wrestling thread I will tell you it like it is, fuckstick.

 

[jholcomb22]

SirJoseOle, I gave an example of Isenberg sending a fake email to Labar, and they showed that to you, would you accept it. You said you "would concede and not talk about the topic anymore." Please forgive me for calling my example the "bogus email," but that is what it would be. So I still don't understand why you would accept that.
And great ending with the word fuckstick. Was that some of that "ammo" you have plenty of?

 

[pepentorresHHH]

here to give my two cents.....
i watch CSR.........i watch raw and sd every week.......dont watch Impact....dont comment here often because ive tried to watch impact sometimes and just cant get throught.....there are millions that can and they like it.....i dont comment on TNA because how can i do that if i dont watch it.....
never been a paying customer to TNA.... ive been to some of their shows because some wrestling fans that i have as friends take me to the tapings in Orlando but other than that never paid much attention to Impact.....
as for the whole situation....i may like CSR but if that email is fake then they are doing a terrible deservice to a struggling company that is just trying to grow and that is not cool....but at the same time the OP or other posters here that are defending Impact so much havent proven that the email was fake as some claim.....
i saw the episode..... and they said that this might be an isolated incident that just got through the cracks but still the paying customer deserves what was promised to him....
CSR is an OPINION Show.....they ve never said they are covering impartial news or are reporting....they are critics that give their takes on the weekly happenings in wrestling, they might be right or wrong but its their opinions, we dont have to watch them if we dont like their opinions....they dont like TNA and take a shot at them at least once per episode....i dont mind because i personally dont like tna..... but i can understand if people get upset that they dont present sufficient proof and do bad pr to impact.....sorry, english isnt my first language

 

[Daniel]

The bottom line is this. This they don't cover a TNA topic unless it supports their opinion. It just happens their opinion is 100 percent negative about the company. It is not even debatable how bad that looks especially when every show they go out of their way to take jabs at TNA.

I don't watch CSR often enough to know whether what you said is true. But even if it is, so? TNA is shocking at the moment. They're simply giving their opinion. Which is what I'd expect from a wrestling review show.

They are definitely reporting the news because just about ever show they talk about dirt sheet stuff from this site and discuss it. You actually have to report news before you can have a discussion on it or they wouldn't have a show.

Discussing dirtsheet news, IS NOT reporting it. They discuss news that has already been reported elsewhere. Reporting news is, erm... reporting it.

Finally even if their was a person who sent in the email who is to say the email is even true? I have seen a few times WZ has posted TNA Live Event emails from posters that are 100 percent completely untrue from the majority of the other live event reports from other sites.

Yes. What's your point? If LaBar and Isenberg have been misled, that's a problem. However, there isn't a rational explanation as to why they would've been misled. And I would have expected that they have taken steps towards verifying this e-mail like any good journalist would.

IMO if they are part of this site and feel the need to report and be critics then you have to be fair and logical about it. If you don't want to cover TNA that is fine. However don't just pick and choose what to report so it helps your argument and so you can poke a little fun. Especially when you are part of one of the more popular wrestling websites on the internet.

THEY ARE NOT REPORTING! How many times do I have to say this? They are giving their opinions on a fun, internet-based wrestling review show. Of course they can be as negative or positive as they want. They have no obligations to be unbiased.

That is not the point. The point is they don't give TNA the time of day and even go as far as to take jabs at the company during their shows. Then when something negative like an email or report hits their desk they decide to cover TNA because it supports their opinion. They cover WWE unbiasedly, but they don't for TNA. However you want to look at it is wrong. Either cover the good and the bad about TNA or don't cover it at all.

I'll think you'll find that it is the point when somebody accuses them of launching a smear campaign against a large corporation.

I don't know how they treat TNA because I don't watch enough of their shows. But as they're not reporters, they can do whatever they like. They don't have to be unbiased.

 

[TheHitMark-SirJoseOle]

SirJoseOle, I gave an example of Isenberg sending a fake email to Labar, and they showed that to you, would you accept it. You said you "would concede and not talk about the topic anymore." Please forgive me for calling my example the "bogus email," but that is what it would be. So I still don't understand why you would accept that.
And great ending with the word fuckstick. Was that some of that "ammo" you have plenty of?

Uh haha, yeah asshole better than what you could think of and this is EXACTLY what you said....

SirJOseOle, it seems like as long as they had shown you exactly what they said in email form, you would stop your bitch fit. So if Isenberg has sent LaBar the email and they blacked out the "emailer" information, but they showed it to you, you would accept it?

I didn't answer your question like that, I said if they could prove something to me I'd accept it...as it says right here in my quote

So the best you can come up with this the term "bitch fit" eh? Well asshole, yeah I would concede and not talk about the topic anymore if they could actually prove something, but the way I look at it, you bring something up you better be ready to back it up, I bet in real life you're probably a little bitch yourself that likes to talk the talk but won't walk the walk. I'd really watch what you say because I've got plenty of ammo and I don't mind using someone's own rounds against them too. Obviously you're a stupid asshole that will believe anything they're told.

Just looked at what I bolded and underlined, I did not say anything about how LaBar and Isenberg would have to concoct some scheme to convince me, all I said was that they better back something up with proof.

 

[boly]

if you don't like the show don't watch their entitled to your opinion as much as you are oh and i sent in my purchase proof and i didn't get 6 months on demand free so i guess TNA were lying. quit the bashing man its a free country

 

[gbswim972]

I can't believe this is what you are so upset about... They are Reporters just like the ones on TV... and you mean to tell me that CNN and Fox News are always legit???? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! It's media... I personally like CSR, if you don't, Don't watch it... Boy thats tough

 

[93178]

First I want to say, I watch RAW, SmackDown, TNA, CSR and H2H every week. I like they all for different reasons and don't like them all for different reasons. All of them have their good things and bad things about then.

Now, on to CSR. Its pretty obvious that Justin and Josh are WWE marks and don't like TNA. They have said how much they don't like TNA many times on the show before. Also like many have pointed out in this thread the only time they really mention TNA is when its something bad about the company and not good. With WWE, they do bash them on the show, but they also praise them on the show. Thats how it should be, with TNA they only bash them and when there is a legit thing on TNA that should be praised and mentioned for something good they just look right past it and look for something bad to say.

Also they have already proven that what they say (or report) on the show is wrong a good amount of time. Like someone else mentioned in this thread some of those things are like when Justin said Bryan was NOT coming back at SS, when they said Sting had signed with WWE and the videos where about him because Taker wouldn't have that kind of video, or when they mentioned Shane's tweets about Shawn's fans, but not when he tweeted and explained what he meant. This could easily be one of those cases of what they are told/hear about and then mention on their show is complete bullshit. Although they have also said a good amount of correct things and this could be one of them.

As far as the e-mail, there is pretty much no way to prove if its legit or not and even if the e-mail is legit, if what the e-mailer said is. Showing the e-mail on screen would not confirm anything, it still could of been written by one of them or just some random dude who's never watched TNA before. Even if they showed the email addr it was sent from, the same thing I just mentioned applies. This could be a real e-mail sent by a real e-mail address but could still just be some TNA hater making shit up, just like it could be legit. The only way to rlly find out is to find out the real namer of the e-mailer and get some kind of list of all of the On Demand things given to people and find their name on that list or not. Thats not going to happen, so it will stay as, if you want to believe it you will, if you don't you wont.

If you don't want to hear TNA bashing, don't watch CSR, everyone should know by now CSR is not the thing to watch for TNA news and praise. Their main audience if people who like WWE so thats who they cater to on their show.

 

[TheHitMark-SirJoseOle]

THEY ARE NOT REPORTING! How many times do I have to say this? They are giving their opinions on a fun, internet-based wrestling review show. Of course they can be as negative or positive as they want. They have no obligations to be unbiased.

In my opinion they are, they go and title a video that has the words "TNA Breaks Promises" in it and of course they titled that to get the fans' attention, and then they go and say that some "fan" emailed them about not getting their TNA On Demand subscription. Just saying man, that sounds like reporting to me. As far as what I said about my experiences with TNA, it might sound extreme and it might sound overboard, but if there was a single person that wanted to challenge me on this issue I'll gladly show you proof like tracking numbers and receipts if need be. I know we are just talking about wrestling, but I feel that what LaBar and Isenberg said was just a little too convenient when they have nothing to back it up.

I mean sure if they showed an email that might not be good enough for some people, but I'd give the benefit of the doubt, but I can't just go and believe that this is a legit thing they're saying if they don't show any proof whatsoever. And the way they "broke" this story was ridiculous that's my view and I think I've got a solid argument to stand on to support this view. And without giving up on how I feel about this topic I appreciate your counterpoints on this as well.

 

[TheHitMark-SirJoseOle]

I can't believe this is what you are so upset about... They are Reporters just like the ones on TV... and you mean to tell me that CNN and Fox News are always legit???? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! It's media... I personally like CSR, if you don't, Don't watch it... Boy thats tough

Obviously, you care enough to chime in on it, if you thought you were so "above" this topic, you'd have just clicked on something else. In fact if anything this topic is getting people to interact and even with those I disagree with I still appreciate their participation. But definitely save the high and mighty bullshit for somewhere else.