AATG ONE HITTER: RED HEADED STEP CHILD
START GAME
So, if you've paid any mind to the various internet news over the last few days then you already know that the television model as we've known it is in the process of change. On the heels of Netflix announcing that they've brokered a deal with Warner Bros. that will bring Friends to their streaming service, (yay, by the way), HBO countered with their own announcement that their HBO Go will soon be a stand alone service, for the first time available without a subscription to the actual cable network. The cherry on top of these announcements would come from CBS, who announced their own "over the top" service that will feature full seasons of current shows with the newest ones being made available the day after original broadcast, as well as a library of shows that have been produced under their banner over the years, (including shows like Cheers that were broadcast on other networks but produced by CBS), and a live feed of what's being broadcast, well, live on the network in real time. Minus the NFL, of course. They, I'm quite sure, have their own plans that will scare the sweet bejeezus out of the networks at some point in the next decade or so.
The point to all of this? Television as we know it is in the process of changing. Many are pointing specifically at a "war" between Netflix, which set the standard that all streaming services must live up to, and HBO. Both Netflix and HBO Go feature some of the hottest and most ballyhooed original programs out there today, in addition to expansive libraries of Hollywood movies and documentaries and stuff. The big difference between the two, based on the things that I've read, seem to be that Netfilx is seen as more the place to watch stuff you've already seen before, like the aforementioned Friends, while HBO Go will cater to the folks who want to watch the hottest things going right now.
I personally feel that's a pretty big slight to Netflix. I seem to recall a shitload of nominations for Netflix exclusive shows during Emmy season this year, infringing upon a standard that had been set in recent years by HBO's original series offerings. Furthermore, though they share many more similarities than simply having been trounced at said Emmys by AMC and Breaking Bad this year, they're actually more compatible services than opposing ones. They offer very similar things that are inherently different simply based on the fact that, well, quite simply, they offer different stuff. Folks who want to see the next season of both Orange is the New Black in addition to Game of Thrones will likely subscribe to both services. The combined approximate estimated $25 monthly price tag for doing so will be much more attractive than paying in excess of $100 for satellite or cable. Those who could care less about HBO or pay television in general have known this for some time, turning instead to Netflix or Hulu or whatever. Or they've used their friends' HBO Go log in information to watch for free, a trend that HBO has previously not only been alright with but has full on encouraged. It'll be interesting to see how their opinions on that notion change once the over the top service begins in full.
The real interesting one is CBS, for my money. They will step forward as the first of the traditional networks to attempt something like this, likely setting the stage for the others to do so in the not too distant future. The issue they face, of course, is that some of their most popular programs, such as The Big Bang Theory, are not produced under the banner of CBS and are just broadcast on their network. Therefore, aside from the current season they've promised, they almost certainly have previous seasons of TBBT available for viewing. Those rights belong to Warner Bros., who one can only imagine is fully aware of how valuable a bargaining chip they have with that and other shows in their pocket as they inevitably work towards potentially having an over the top service of their own one day.
All of which raises an interesting point. Warner Bros., as mentioned, just brokered a deal with Netflix for streaming rights to Friends. They will also very likely field serious offers from CBS for streaming rights to shows like Big Bang. But what about when they decide to do their own thing? What about when Universal does the same? Or Viacom? So forth, so on, right down the line? We very well may be looking to a future that sees us having to pay X amount of dollars to a litany of different entities to maintain the same television viewing habits that we currently possess. NBC, CBS, ABC and Fox will quite possibly be replaced by three or four times as many pay services within the next ten years, forcing us to subscribe to them all in order to watch our favorite shows.
This, of course, leads to the interesting question of what will become of television as we know it? When NBC has their own over the top service, will they incorporate networks like USA in with the mix? Will it be a company wide service or a channel specific service? Many are pointing towards a la carte options on satellite and cable as they try to maintain relevancy in the coming years, providing people will a choice of, for instance, 20 channels of their choice instead of the myriad of channels, mostly useless and unwatched, that come with today's service. Even if that does go down, how long will it last before the seeming wave of over the top services overtakes even that business model?
I'm sure you're wondering, at this point, just what in the hell this has to do with wrestling. The answer is a lot. USA currently broadcasts Raw in the States, as we well know, and will continue to do so for a few years to come. By the time the clock rolls around to renegotiate that deal again, though, just who will they be negotiating with? A different version of the USA we know now? A stand alone USA over the top subscription based network? A combined overall NBC/Universal over the top network? Or will they be left out in the cold, cast aside as an outdated necessity in the potentially non-existent ratings wars, left to find their own way?
If the latter is the case, does that mean that Raw and Smackdown and the like would all become exclusive to the WWE Network?
That's an intriguing question, to be sure. I'm not sure where the answer lies, personally. If WWE truly is like the major sports entities, it will likely find itself in a very interesting position. What I mean by that is resistance to change. Many think that the NFL will one day say fuck network television, as it's slowly withering on the vine, and instead branch out with their very own over the top service. The NFL Network in its current form would cease to exist, instead becoming very much like the WWE Network and broadcasting all the games via their service and their service alone. The impact of a move like this on traditional network television would be almost a death blow.
I don't see that as a terribly likely scenario, at least not in the near future. I mentioned resistance to change before. What I meant is that people are and have always been used to watching NFL games on regular old TV. The NFL is fully aware of that fact and will cater to those fans to a large degree as long as their relevance is tangible, which is likely for at least the next 20 years. That supposition is supported by their bending somewhat to the will of fans who have complained in recent years about not being able to see the NFL Network exclusive Thursday night games. In that same breath, though, they gave exactly zero fucks when people cried out over their moving Monday Night Football to ESPN, thus making the game available only to those who have some form of pay TV service. So even my previous supposition has a weak support structure, at best.
WWE could very well be left out in the cold, is my point. Sure, many of us would be happy as hell to have Raw and Smackdown available live on the Network every week right now, but that's mainly so we wouldn't have to pay for cable or whatever. WWE programming is a large part of the reason that I still have satellite service, myself, and I'm quite positive that I'm not alone in that. As long as it can only be viewed there, there's a reason for USA or any other network to desire the broadcast rights to it.
Once USA as we know it now is a thing of the past, though? Who knows? Maybe they'll still negotiate for rights to broadcast Raw live on the USA over the top network or whatever its equivalent will be. Or, somewhat scarily more likely, WWE will wind up as the red headed step child of the traditional cable bunch, a valuable asset that doesn't seem to be recognized as such. Yes, the idea of Raw and Smackdown live on the Network is an awesome thought RIGHT NOW, but do we really want a future where the entirety of WWE's success rests squarely upon people subscribing to the Network, unable to access any sort of WWE programming via today's traditional network means? Do I even have any sort of historical basis for predicting such a potentially dire future circumstance?
Sure I do. Kinda the point of writing these column things.
It's nothing new, as we all know. Pro wrestling in general is dismissed as a marginal endeavor, at best. When the aforementioned Emmys roll around every year, how many nominations does WWE get? They produce between 8 and 11 hours of live event programming on a weekly basis, consistently maintaining a production quality that is almost unheard of in that genre, and are never, NEVER even looked twice upon as worthy of any props from the mainstream. For those who would argue that they don't fit the mold of the Emmys, as they are a sports based entity, what about the Sports Emmy Awards? They don't fit that mold, either, at least based upon how many honors they've received. That would be none, for those counting. None honors.
Despite the fact that WWE is a billion dollar company that was built from the ground up, it is dismissed regularly. No awards, no recognition outside of genre specific type stuff. I'm sure there's some entity out there that votes for the best wrestling video package of the year or whatever, but the fact that I haven't the faintest fucking clue who they are would kinda belie the fact that they're not so much "mainstream".
The biggest slight? In all the talk of this evolving television structure these last few days, all the talk about how HBO Go is changing the game and how CBS is blazing the trail to the future, I have not seen a single fucking word said about the WWE Network. Not one. Not even an insulting, dismissive mention, like, "HBO Go is going to be super neato, unlike WWE's lame ass try at an over the top service," or something of that sort. This despite the fact that WWE Network will surely provide a model towards which many of these services will be built toward. Sure, Netflix is the standard for streaming content in general, but they don't have a live streaming network service that they maintain at the same time. There is no Netflix Channel.
Many, nay, most of these companies will be looking to provide streamable content from the "vault" while also maintaining a live streaming channel. The only large scale model for that type of service right now? WWE Network. I'm not sure if HBO plans to incorporate a live streaming channel as part of their Go service when it launches, but CBS is, as will NBC and CBS and all those others will very likely be following suit. They will all be looking at WWE Network as the industry standard. Why? Because, at least in this moment, it flat out is.
So that's how it goes. WWE, constantly suffering beatings and abuse and slander from the very fans that it entertains and provides new content for on a damn near daily basis, finds itself suffering an even worse potential indignity from the entertainment world it so desperately tries to be a part of. That it IS a part of, recognition or not. Dwayne Johnson is the biggest movie star in the world, but I guarantee you that "WWE superstar and former champion, The Rock" is a much bigger draw than "former CFL washout, Dwayne" would have ever been. Raw remains one of the top rated programs on cable television every single week, even if it's nowhere near on the ratings levels of years gone by. Live events sell out regularly, televised events even more frequently and WrestleMania has reached a level to which only the Super Bowl and Olympics are comparable, with cities literally bidding and making a huge production for in an effort to bring the spectacle and its MASSIVE economy boosting powers to their neck of the woods.
Despite that, no respect. They have created a unique, genuinely trailblazing business model in the WWE Network that they get absolutely no mainstream recognition for, helping to craft a future in which they very well may find themselves the odd man out. All the history dating back to 1952, the lives' work of now three generations of the McMahon family, the countless hours of pure joy and entertainment for its audience... all potentially washed away, ironically via the floodwaters that they allowed in by opening the over the top door that may well spell their eventual demise.
I don't think it'll go down that way. Surely, someone will recognize the worth of the company and its definitively held spot in the cultural history of the entertainment industry. Surely, someone will come riding up on a white horse to save the company, perhaps the entire industry, that we so love. Surely, WWE will find a way to survive.
Could we one day see the headline, "NBC/Universal Inks Deal to Acquire World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc."?
All for the low, low cost of just $9.99.
END GAME