How Honest or Objective Is the MMA Media?
by Luke Thomas on Oct 30, 2008 1:36 PM EDT
in MMA News
Email
PrintIf you've ever listened to a UFC conference call, reporters from major newspapers or large media outlets greet White & Co. like they are pubescent teenage girls waiting for their invitation to the hottest sweet sixteen party in the land. Add to that their general incompetence or "on the job" learning about MMA and you have a crowd that often tries to play buddy with the UFC while buying their narratives without much discussion or debate. In the wake of the revelation that Scott Ferrall was paid to attend and cover UFC events by the UFC, Robert Joyner has more on the highly disappointing MMA media's coverage:
This area is only a piece of the puzzle when it comes to the media and how it relates to the UFC. Through various deals with media outlets, or the tying of access to coverage, what we have arrived at is a MMA media corps that lacks any adversarial role in its coverage of the UFC. And with a fanbase that is generally conditioned to support the organization over the fighters or the sport itself, you are left with readership that doesn’t care if the tough questions are asked. One of the best pieces of radio I have heard in the past few years was the infamous Dan Patrick interview of NBA head David Stern, with Patrick raking Stern over the coals for his suspension of players for a playoff game. Would that kind of scenario even be possible in MMA?
No, probably not. And this is partly why blogs will never get credentialed: anyone that covers the UFC outside of the UFC's narratives or organizational expectations is persona non grata.
I would say, however, that Ferrall is in radio and not straight reporting. My experience in radio is limited, but from what I am able to tell a guy like Ferrall and his job is far more entertainment than information. I am not up in arms as much as others about Ferrall although I do acknowledge there is a certain mendacity to it all. It's literally purchased commentary.
Whatever the case, if you're expecting hard hitting analysis that is smart, draws upon a deep understanding of MMA history, represents viewpoints fairly and isn't drenched with UFC talking points, you'd be wise (generally speaking) to skip the MSM. They're mostly too busy giving Dana White high fives and telling knock-knock jokes.
UPDATE: Let me amend this slightly. There are some members of the sports reporting community who do call it mostly as they see it. Steve Cofield of ESPN Las Vegas seems to be quite fair and is known for offering appropriate criticism of White or the UFC. But there are two problems here.
First, the Cofields of this world are few and far between. Second, there is a culture of acceptance among the press that covers the UFC. I don't think its unfair to suggest the UFC would exercise retribution or exclusion for knowledgable and influential criticism from reporters or journalists in the MSM. Press credentials in the UFC are handed out very carefully and strong demands are made on reporters covering the UFC relative to the NBA, NFL, MLB, etc.
Whoever's fault it is - be it the reporters themselves or the UFC or both - there is an unsettling closeness between the two groups that is inhibiting more penetrating or honest commentary.
53 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Agree 100%
I’ve always felt that mainstream reporters are under the impression that anything worth covering in mma is controlled by the UFC. Most reporters cover it because of the UFC’s sudden surge in popularity, not because they are interested in it.
I think mainstream coverage will get better in the next several years. Now that the sport is established serious sports news outlets will seek better journalists who actually know something about mma. That view may be a little too optimistic, but I feel reporters like Josh Gross moving to Sports Illustrated is the start of a good trend for mma journalism.
Yeah how good were the MMA Blogosphere on the Kimbo Hype?
It was like an NBA team getting this kid from the streets who would beat chumps in pick ups and just because his videos were hot on youtube they picked him up and put him on prime time in a starting position….
You think the NBA media would let that slide?
Well there wasn’t any word from this hard hitting MMA Blog media you’re talking about regarding Kimbo Slice… as soon as some blogs got credentialed they got on their knees and begged for butter milk.
What’s hard hitting about MMA Payout??? As soon as they got Cohen on an interview they didn’t challenge a single thing he said… instead All I heard were softballs.
I’m not sure what you’re driving at. This blog has never altered its opinion on anything Slice related since he was still on YouTube. And I make no apologies for initially being intrigued by Slice and his inclusion in the MMA community. It was not a foregone conclusion he’d be terrible and all of the expectations of his marketing prowess came true. The real culprit in the Slice fiasco was not Slice himself, but EliteXC for the way Slice was portrayed and handled. It was the kneejerk MSM that immediately insulted and dismissed Slice long before it was appropriate to do so. And when it was revealed matters had become corrupt behind the scenes, it was the blogosphere and online media that pushed the story.
As for getting credentialed, EliteXC always credentialed us and never said a word about our commentary. I can’t say much in defense of that organization, but I can say that.
Joe Klein of Time – after it was revealed he wrote Primary Colors – was still allowed to cover President Clinton on Air Force One. One can barely say a critical word of White before he excommunicates you. The difference in approaches to the role of the press could not be clearer.
Im not talking about bloody elbow… I find it to be the most biased towards common sense and logic.
But your point was the MMA Blog media as a whole…
And I’ll say again if boxing tried to pull a “Kimbo” they wouldn’t have gotten away with it. ex. butterbean.
Yeah it’s elite’s decision but it’s supposed to be the media to say wait a second…
The Online media is blackballed from the UFC because 2 outlets posted tuf results before the show even aired.
One of those geniuses was none other than Josh Gross.
by mmalogic on Oct 30, 2008 1:50 PM EDT up reply actions 1 recs
Two points
It’s not all palling around with Dana. On his own Vlog, there was an individual admonishing him for pissing on Elite’s gravestone. He does receive some criticism publicly, but he’s excellent at deflecting it. Not only is he running the show, but he’s a sharp mouth piece. I really believe that that, in large part, discourages the media from approaching him in the same manner as a David Stern (who often comes off as nervous and defensive).
And I’ve made my comments about Ferrall already. I feel that it falls into the electrolosis-peddling, radio-DJ promotional sect of media— and not the buttoned-up, laterally critical journalists that should not accept payment to attend and promote events.
That individual admonishing Dana was Kevin Iole. Iole was also the one who led the press room revolt when UFC tried to shut Tito Ortiz out of the UFC 84 press conference.
But of course, these things are rarely noted by the blogs because they doesn’t fit the preconceived storyline that the mainstream media is soft.
“But of course, these things are rarely noted by the blogs because they doesn’t fit the preconceived storyline that the mainstream media is soft.”
Well, that’s because they are. Iole has a personal relationship with White, so it’s not as if any journalist could do that and still get credentialed. How do I know Iole has a relationship with White? He told me over the phone himself. I’m glad Iole stood up to White, but it’s not as if any journalist could’ve done that.
I think Iole is a grand exception and even then there are limitations placed on him.
The vast majority, however, cannot.
I would argue, then
That when ESPN and more mainstream media ramp up their coverage of MMA, then Dana and co may have the tables turned, and rely on their coverage more than those journalists rely on his acceptance. And when questioning in a more controversial manner becomes acceptable to those few, they could very well become acceptable to many. We continually bring up the fact that MMA is still just a baby. I think that is why I’m not prepared to jump to any conclusions, regarding the timid approach to MMA journalism; because even MMA coverage is in mainstream infancy.
ESPN sucks up to the athletes and leagues they cover more flagrantly than any other organization in the media.
Coverage is in its infancy, but the reporters are ostensibly veterans. Do the rules change because the sport did, too?
I agree in large part with what you’re saying, but I cannot say there isn’t a timidity or strange favoritism going on.
Yes, I think they might
UFC is in absolute control of their product. They haven’t crossed the threshold into popular American media. What I’m trying to say is that when they do, and the media coverage becomes a more important part of their successes on a much larger scale, they’ll need to allow for more criticism. Because maybe when it comes to that level of exposure, they’ll need the media more than the media needs them.
Zuffa doesn’t mind adversarial press…
There is a big difference getting tough questions from a media outlet that reaches new eyeballs vs old eyeballs.
Most Blogs and MMA sites get most of their new unique hits from either the UFC or a UFC promoted fighter… So getting grilled by the guys who actually get their traffic from you is kind of not worth it… especially since they also cover other MMA outlets whereas the mainstream media barely has enough time for just UFC coverage.
The mainstream media largely ripped the UFC 90 main event, and were criticized on most of the blogs for doing so. Seems more to me like the blogs are interested in simply taking the opposite view of the mainstream for its own sake.
I’ll not you’re not refuting that the mainstream ripped UFC 90 and the blogs ripped the mainstream media for doing so.
Proceed. Noting the event wasn’t fun or fulfilling does not constitute meaningful analysis. I mean, UFC 90 wasn’t really an opportunity to do anything meaningful one way or the other, so I’m not bagging on them for their work this time.
It works both ways, though.
It’s not as thought the enthusiast sites and the blogs are short on UFC/Dana White haters.
I find that very few contributors are unbiased, truly unbiased, with great regularity. And I don’t think that’s the end of the world if you can explain to your audience from where your point of view is coming. But when you assert an antagonistic opinion against the UFC in particular, or even more silly an attack against Dana White personally, it becomes difficult for me to justify returning to your product with any regularity.
Believe it or not, that’s a major ethics issue in academics at the moment. Most in the social sciences and humanities realize that there’s no such thing as a completely object, neutral, unbiased observer. Instead, everyone is just supposed to be open about their bias/subjectivity. But what about when someone changes their opinion? I happens. But in academics – much like in the press – once you’ve written something, it’s on paper and people hold you to it past any point of reason.
So there you go, Kid. You’d fit in well with the PhDs.
This isn’t always true, for example Neil Davidson (sp?) in Canada is extremely adversarial with White and still gets access.
Certain websites actively cheerleaded for EliteXC and Affliction. MMA Junkie’s coverage of the scandal, for example, was completely ridiculous.
This is a problem across the board in MMA media, not just UFC. MMA Live even aired all of Affliction’s claims of success without doubt, and did the same for EliteXC. Watching that show for weeks you’d have no idea EXC’s demise was imminent.
I should also say I think the press is a lot easier on Affliction and EliteXC than the UFC. MMA websites sucking up to them in exchange for credentials has been a bit sickening.
That was the other point I wanted to make. While some, like Luke, have been responsible when they’ve gotten access, others haven’t. And, honestly, I think if half the people who gripe about the mainstream actually had access to UFC press conferences, they wouldn’t be anywhere near as tough on Dana as they imagine they would be.
I have to agree. The week or so after I read an article on MMAWeekly about Affliction “successful” first show and it basically read as a Atencio press release. What bugged me in particular, was the reporting of of the acceptance of the inflated PPV buys that Atencio gave out, among other things. I lost my taste for them and haven’t really been back, other than a few stories linked by other sites.
I really, really have a strong dislike of the way MMAPayout covers the UFC. I find they are grossly biased and take whatever chance to shoot at the UFC that they can. Unfortunately, there’s not many (any other?) blogs that cover the business aspect of MMA and they do provide some pretty good insight most of the time.
I know it’s a blog and all, but not every single entry needs to be injected with a healthy dose of opinion. Just report the facts as they present themselves and let people make their own decisions. Not everybody is as stupid as Robert Joyner thinks they are.
I agree with you, but no one dedicates their time to it like MMAPayout. They provide interesting information like projected buy rates, DVD sales, show ratings, etc. Joyner’s and Swift’s opinion pieces are generally horrible and it my humble opinion that they would be better suited to sticking to the facts.
Small part of a larger question
How honest or objective is the media in general?
Not very.
They get paid to print favorable stories that promote the people involved in the stories, and are not paid by the public to do the public a service. They are doing a service for those involved in their articles and to a lesser extent the reader. People only ask tough questions when the feel of the public’s perception of the issue is biased enough that they can take the “risk” of being a real journalist.
This is a great piece. The thing that always seems funny to me. Even on various blogs, is the us VS them mindset. Anytime you are critical of the UFC. You automatically get labeled a UFC hater. Anytime you praise the work of a rival promotion. You get labeled a UFC hater. Anytime you hope a rival promotion doesnt fold. You become a UFC hater. It seems that far too many UFC fans refuse to take a pragmatic approach to the growth of the sport. Just my .02 cents.
" Tell me something Steve, How does a guy from Puerto Rico loose a ball in the Sun? "
John Mcain refuses to go on certain networks/shows/stations as does Obama…
“Any press is good press, it’s all good because you’re talking about elite xc, and the more your talk about elite xc the better it is for elite xc”
- Jared Shaw (5 days before Elite XC went under)
What McCain and Palin are doing is unprecedented. Palin, whatever you think of her views, is the first VP candidate in modern history to never hold a single press conference after nomination. And they banned Klein for being unflattering, which even Clinton did not do.
I’m not suggesting Zuffa has to approve everyone with blogspot address. That is neither prudent nor logistically feasible. But to disregard even popular blogs with writers who are more than bloggers (I do have a show on CBS radio, after all) seems absurd.
After all, Cofield and I both blog and do radio, so what’s the difference in principle? The proportion we spend doing one or the other? That seems awfully petty to me.
Great article but just have a curious question for any of the writers that contribute to this site. Will you be credentialed to cover WAMMA events since Brent Bookhouse posted that unflattering piece about them?
Well..
..WAMMA doesn’t hold events, and I sincerely doubt they have the control to ban anyone from an Affliction show. Any ban they would exercise would be from further interviews and exclusive information regarding their titles and organization. I think Brent made a calculated risk, because he saw that there is nothing substantial to gain from an all-smiles relationship with WAMMA in the future. I appreciated his candor, quite frankly.
Very true
WAMMA does not hold events yet don’t get me wrong I enjoyed his articles and what I meant to ask was if they would be banned from interviews, exclusive info as you said. Only reason I ask is because I was kicked off Five ounces of pains blog for forwarding that article to Sam Caplan.
Not very surprising...
It’s not very surprising that there is, of course, a bias in regards to MMA journalism.
Hopefully as journalists become more experienced with the sport, they’ll realize that there is MMA outside of the UFC. But one of the problems with this, IMO, is that there really isn’t any alternative competition to the UFC right now.
Sure, Affliction is ramping up for its second PPV, but the casual viewer doesn’t know who or what Affliction is, or that they are now a promoter.
I’m also glad the author of this article took the time to update the article and mention that there are fair reporters covering MMA on ESPN and other publications.
Amazing
This post is both amazing, and personally greatly amusing. I’m not sure each of your affiliates would agree.
Bravo Luke Thomas for making this post.
Truly incredible—given phone calls I have this week. . .
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
MMA Rankings
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
