What is with WWE's obsession with shock value?

[Showtime]

I get it some what. WWE is trying to keep us on our toes and keep us interested in the product. How they do that is by pulling these surprises out from underneath us and leave us wondering what will happen next. Some times it is very successful. When Cena shocked us all by being in the Royal Rumble that was done well. Nobody saw it coming and the next night we all wanted to see what happened next. When Edge first used MITB, again another good surprise and the next night turned in huge numbers (course the 'live sex' Edge promised didn't hurt either). So in some instances, a little shock and surprise can be a good thing that can help increase ratings and get fans interested, but at times I think WWE is far over doing it.

Look at CM Punk using MITB the first time. Yes it was a great surprise, albeit the length of time Batista beat up Edge had me suspecting a bit MITB would be cashed, but what did WWE gain from it? Their rating was a 3.5 that RAW, slightly higher than what they were averaging, but about the same. Now imagine how high it would be if CM Punk came out, face to face with Edge after he said he was leaving RAW for good, and told him he still has to face him tonight for the title, and then beat him. Well ratings probably would increased as the night went on, and CM Punk, even if Batista ended up interfering in the match, would've came out looking like a more legit champion beating Edge in a match than after Edge was destroyed.

Look at when Edge returned at last RR, surprised, yes, but did WWE gain anything in ratings, No. Did they gain anything extra in buy rates, or course not. Did Edge come back as a face like WWE wanted, kinda, but it did take a while. For weeks the crowd was about 60-40 with him. When HHH returned from injury before the 2002 RR, he returned 2 Raws before RR on Jan 7 to a 4.9, WWE had a 4 on Dec 17 show and a 4.4 on the Jan 14. The PPV buys were over 660,000, that being the last RR PPV that had over 600,000 buys. Why might this be? Well WWE for months promoted HHH's return. HHH at the time of injury was a heel and were trying to turn him to a face. They promoted his return before RR so people could anticipate his victory at the RR and order RR. Edge was given no hype for his return, no promos or videos, no indication that he would return there, so no extra incentive to order the PPV, and no reason why he should suddenly be a face. So WWE lost out again on what could've been a hike in rating at Edge returned the RAW before and lost out on maybe a couple 1000 buys if the audience knew Edge was coming.

These are just a couple of the instances where WWE has attempted to serve us all with shock value. It happens regularly it seems; out of the blue title changes, surprise returns that I didn't see coming. But does it all really improve ratings and keep interest. My personal opinion is no, not often. While a surprise here and there is good, WWE always trying to swerve us often leaves me confused. If there is no build towards something then there is no reason to watch it. WWE I feel is shooting themselves in the foot by giving away each time a shocking twist or surprise that no one saw coming, and that's quite literally because there was no build or anticipation for it, and no reasons I should've ordered the PPV or watched RAW or SD to see it. Often all these twists and swerves would just leave me confused and turned off by the product cause there is no stability and no reason to watch it if, in 2 weeks Chavo could be champion. I want to see WWE build somebobys return, not just have them jump out of a box and win the title. That doesn't get anybody watching or interested. It just leaves me confused. Maybe WWE is afraid their audience doesn't have the attention spans for long feuds. I don't know, but what I know is nothing has been gained so far from the last 3 MITB's, the constant title changes haven't done anything to promote or push the champions (except for Cena of course) and ratings continue to slowly decline. Is WWE's next big surprise a quiet exit? Maybe not far down the road unless we have a stable product with good strong builds for matches and returns that we can become excited about.

Thoughts?

 

[Dowdsy McDowds]

Good topic and I agree with what you're saying.

You've done a good amount of research to support your claims too which not enough people seem to do.

To weigh in on the surprise V built up return, to this day I think the most excited I got over someone's return was Kane's in 2002 (I think) where he beat up the Un-Americans. There had been short promo's for several weeks with semi-cryptic messages that didn't give many clues as to when he was coming back. The fact they even showed a promo message before he came out made his return about a minute later even better in my eyes. This example kind of sits on the borders as it was a surprise when he returned, but it had been built up a lot, arguably because it was Kane's last big push before he was de-masked.

The on-going surprises could be down to the IWC's constant guessing, speculating, hear-say etc of what the WWE are doing. We know a lot more nowadays about backstage politicking and spoilers etc because of the internet, so I don't think we can begrudge them too much for keeping some big cards close to their chest. For an ordinary fan, a lot of things will be surprising, but to us, instances such as Cena returning and winning the Rumble are pretty much the only big shocks left nowadays. Aside from deaths

 

[Jack-Hammer]

An obsession with shock value would involve the WWE trying to shock the audience at the drop of a hat on a weekly basis. The WWE throws occassional surprises like cashing in the MITB briefcase unexpectedly as a means of shaking things up. Even if some of the surprises don't necessarily result in an increase in ratings, even on a temporary basis, it's still fun to surprise the viewers that are already watching.

When Sheamus won the WWE Championship, it was shocking. I don't think anybody truly believed the WWE would give such an unknown their original world title. Whether some loved it or hated it, it generated buzz about the WWE Championship and main event scenes on Raw and that's exactly what the WWE wanted. People were tired of constantly seeing Cena, Orton and Triple H in the WWE Championship scene and it had gone on for most of 2009.

Jack Swagger wins the MITB match at WM 26 and nobody really expected it to happen. The favorite was Christian followed by Kofi Kingston. Swagger came to Raw about this time last year and had a lot of momentum and, over the course of his time on Raw, he was basically turned into a jobber. However, he's still been able to generate good heat even while a heel and remained someone a lot of fans cared about seeing to some degree. Since receiving this push, it's got people talking about the WHC scene, interested in what Swagger is currently doing and want to see where it's ultimately going to go.

Since last summer, the WWE has been steadily building younger talent. Dolph Ziggler, John Morrison, the Miz, Kofi Kingston, Sheamus, Drew McIntyre are all examples of that. Post WrestleMania 26, the WWE has added Jack Swagger and the Hart Dynasty to that list of young guys getting a push and/or rub. I've got no problem with the way the WWE has been doing things in 2010. They've found a formula that's worked pretty well throughout this year.

 

[The Mizard of Oz]

So when John Cena returns with no promotion and wins the Royal Rumble, it's good, but when Edge does the EXACT SAME THING, it's bad? I have a hard time following your logic there.

I tend to disagree. I don't believe everything should be promoted weeks ahead of time. Maybe it's just the Attitude era fan in me. I like to be shocked.

 

[boozinjedi]

Good topic and I agree with what you're saying.

For an ordinary fan, a lot of things will be surprising, but to us, instances such as Cena returning and winning the Rumble are pretty much the only big shocks left nowadays. Aside from deaths

Which sad to say can become WAY too commonplace,the shock of an early death
BUT to answer the question put forth by the thread title..

My guess is they think the WOM type of advertising is so much better and cheaper,
(WOM=Word of Mouth)

The next day when something like that happens,you got friends coming up to you and saying "Did you see that?"
OR maybe you're the one saying those things,It might not spike the PPV buys,BUT it defintitely increases Raw/Smackdown ratings the show after the PPV.

Remember how big the WOM was way back with Hogan's heel turn in WCW??

Setting up for short term spike in PPV buys OR
Shocking to set up for a long term ratings-inducing feud?


It's like flipping a coin!!

 

[wtfhappened]

I think the only shock that works well is the surprise heel turn. If they continue to do that one right and not flip flop people like WCW used to do and TNA is doing.

The rumble was always a great place for shock value it's just they do lose a lot of audience with PPV just because even long time fans don't want to shell out the $40+ per ppv (I can't believe I spent 60 on mania).

I think the best way to go about bringing someone in is the unknown vignettes like they did with Tazz and Jericho when they first entered. They were good because nobody was really sure who was coming in at the time (maybe the internet folk did but I was young then and don't really remember) I think that's a good way to build hype for something but not give it all away.

MITB went stale after edge's 2nd title win. I liked that Punk used it the second time because it set up a nice heel run for him but they rarely give the winner a chance to solidify himself as the change because he usually loses it in the first or second major title defense.

Someone pointed out that Sheamus brought the attention to the title the only thing is it never gave him or the title anymore prestige or credibility. He was this monster heel that one the title in a flute where Cena (in a painfully obvious way) jumps off the turnbuckle through a table. I could've lived with that as long as they gave him a good run with it. But the flip flop title changes seem to ruin the prestige of the title and seem to be there for shock value which does nothing for the ratings or the title.

I think they should start treating the main titles with more respect, have them mostly defended on PPVs, only once a night and get rid of storylines like Punk (the champ) gets taken out before the match and Jericho gets to take his place.

I truly feel if the treated the titles like they actually met something and let the boys duke it out on PPV they would have better buy rates and probably have a lot less of these non-nonsensical shock value turns.

great thread

 

[Blue Chipper]

WWE provides a certain extent of shock in their programs because they know it will garner the fans interest, and thus they'll keep watching. The modern wrestling fan is a fan of not only the wrestling aspect, but the entertainment aspect.

Wrestling didn't expand and become the phenomenon it is by showcasing matches with a high level of technical input, but by including drama in their shows.

Bottom line, it draws.

 

[Greenlight13]

It's not unique to the WWE. Shocks and surprises are appealing in almost every form of media. People like unexpected sports teams upsetting giants. The same two teams getting to the finals every year is dull. How good would a film or TV show be if everything you thought was going to happen happened? Sure, there's expectation fulfillment, but the most successful films and TV shows threw curve balls at you that you simply didn't see coming. It gets people talking. This is why shows like Lost and 24 have thrived, because you don't know what to expect. Reality TV is based around unpredictability.

With all that in mind I don't really see how this can be a legitimate question. Every time the Money in the Bank briefcase has been cashed in, with the exception of RVD, the crowd has erupted and I personally marked out. Considering how I think I've seen it all and am reasonably well versed in the trends of wrestling, it takes a lot to make me get genuinely excited about a moment in wrestling.

Cena winning the Rumble got EVERYONE talking. Christopher Daniels turning up in ROH and it later being revealed he had left TNA had everyone who keeps up with Indie wrestling talking (I concede we're a limited breed, but still.)

If you look back at the greatest moments in the history of wrestling, in the WWE or any other company, I think you'll find 90% of them were surprises.

 

[Showtime]

So when John Cena returns with no promotion and wins the Royal Rumble, it's good, but when Edge does the EXACT SAME THING, it's bad? I have a hard time following your logic there.

I tend to disagree. I don't believe everything should be promoted weeks ahead of time. Maybe it's just the Attitude era fan in me. I like to be shocked.

The logic is first time surprises are good, but they will get old fast. Here's logic for you. Take a Jack in the Box. You turn the crank and boom the Jack pops out and you're surprise. Do it a second, a third, a fourth and so on and the surprise gets less and less and less. After the first time, you don't need to do it again, the mystery of when it will happen again is what keeps you watching and the longer you wait, the more you would anticipate it. When Cena did it, it was especially unexpected due to us thinking he'd be out till WM. Ratings went from a 3.5 before RR to a 3.9 the RAW after. After WWE does the Cena shocking return, WWE doesn't need to do it again. They have our attention that anything can happen and if their general audience didn't have the attention of 8-year olds (strange cause they are mostly 8-12 year olds) they would keep watching without needing it to happen again. When Edge did it, it's been done before. The ratings didn't spike after RR and the fans didn't care anymore that Edge won than they did before the Rumble. Had Edge been promoted to return, the fans would've carried. Edge himself has done too many shocking no-push returns, Survivor Series 07 being another I can think of, that his surprise return does nothing for ratings or Edge, especially if he's doing the same thing he's doing as a heel only now as a face and chanting spear a lot.

The point is surprises are good once in a while and out of the blue. WWE has had an almost ridiculous amount of shock title changes in the past 3-4 years that if you don't watch weekly you have no clue what's going on, heck even if you do sometimes your still a little lost. Did they have this many last minute Title matches at the end of PPV's during the attitude era. No, Austin, Rock, and others chased after the gold and it was the anticipation that they would win that kept the fans watching, not surprise title changes here there and everywhere that screwed them over. And Austin didn't make a sudden re-appearance at a PPV and win the gold, if he won the gold, it was damn promoted either with months of PPV build or at least announced at the start of the show he's be wrestling the champ at the main event. Now thats how you draw and build an audience.

 

[darbare]

they make wrestling unpredictable and give guys chances....whether some feel cm punk failed after his shock value, it gave him attention and look where hes at now....same with swagger, just give him time....i have yet to see shock value turn into something negative....

 

[Navi]

they make wrestling unpredictable and give guys chances....whether some feel cm punk failed after his shock value, it gave him attention and look where hes at now....same with swagger, just give him time....i have yet to see shock value turn into something negative....

I have to agree and disagree with you at the same time. I agree that "the shock value" makes wrestling unpredictable and it's great for the fans. Example - John Cena's coming in at number 30 at the Royal Rumble. It was great for the fans, and they almost blew the roof of the building that night. It also made Raw the show to watch the following night.

But I disagree that it can have a negative effect. Take Punk for example. The guy was pushed to the moon and back, only to have the title taken away from him by a backstage sneak attack. He went from main eventer to mid carder in one fell swoop. As for Sheamus, not only was his title win a shock, it also showed how much the fans cared about him. They didn't and his matches were horrible. Now of course he's getting major heat in his feud with HHH, but his first title run was abysmal.

I myself love the shock value and like to see surprises every now and again. It keeps the product fresh and makes it exciting to be a wrestling fan when it doesn't look as scripted.