Another Take on the Dana White Media Conflict

Not if your job is reporting, you can’t.

I understand where you’re coming from, but first of all, Jake Rossen isn’t a news reporter, he’s an op-ed writer for the “Blog” sub-section of an MMA site. While many of the things he writes are short-sighted, even misguided, they are designed to get his readers riled up. Jake Rossen has never purported to speak for his website, nor for the MMA media as a whole.

That being said, I disagree with your sympathetic interpretation of White’s rant. Yes, the word “promote” can be charitably read as “concerned with the growth and development of,” but it is VERY self-serving of him to think that this one event, UFC 108, needs to be at the forefront of every discussion about the past decade in MMA, and the one to follow. I’m sorry, but one can be concerned about the present and future of this sport, and think that dropping $50 on a Pay Per View this weekend is neither necessary nor recommended. I think that it’s quite clear that Dana wants the media to raise the awareness of the UFC, to the detriment of other organizations, and provide coverage that is slanted in favor of that organization. After all, for a man so concerned with the growth of the sport, he has been scathing in his criticisms of “Strikefarce,” DREAM, and other so-called second-rate organizations, even going as far as to display a virtual graveyard for fallen MMA organizations. Is such behavior likely to bring networks and other corporate partners to the sport, or to engender faith in the MMA market and its fanbase? No; it promotes a VERY narrow vision of what MMA is to look like in order to succeed, one which not-coincidentally has his company at the head, for all time. Is it any wonder, then, that his true quote was that “UFC” would be the #1 sport in ten years.

For any journalist that isn’t merely concerned with the UFC, but the health of the sport of a whole, this contention that Dana White & Company’s narrow vision of what the sport must look like, from a promotional, business, and sporting perspective, needs to be parroted and unflinchingly endorsed, is anathema. There is a UFC.com, and on that site, we should expect all the puff pieces that the Zuffa checks can afford. However, as other sites represent the viewpoints of its writing staff, and reflect those of its readership, one should expect divergent perspectives, some which want the UFC to maintain a stranglehold on the sport, and others which want there to multiple organizations attempting to grow the sport in different ways.

Yesterday, the two top promotions in Japan combined their forces to put on the best possible New Year’s Eve show that they could do, in an attempt to keep MMA popular and relevant in that country. The success or failure of that event will have major ramifications for the sport, and any fan who considers global growth of the sport to be a worthwhile endeavor should have been paying attention to it. UFC 108 is just the latest in a line of events, one which will barely make a blip on the radar of Zuffa’s continuing advance. It’s not “make or break,” and in fact, most writers think that since the event has been bitten by the injury bug, its performance will be excused as anomalous. The role of media is to evaluate which of two events is more newsworthy, and give coverage accordingly. If Dana is upset with the amount of coverage an event is getting, perhaps he should be doing less ranting, and doing more to make his fights and fighters matter. Perhaps he should be reading the tea leaves of his PPV buyrates, and seeing that fans get fired up by big-time main events, and less so by lackluster ones, so he needs to work overtime to put together those big-time main events. In short, he needs to stop shooting the messengers, and start reading their scrolls.

But here’s the thing: If ESPN’s Bill Simmons, a self-professed Pro Basketball Enthusiast with TONS more reach than Rossen, can write pieces about the “No Benjamins Association” and about how All is Not Well in the sport, and not have his motivations criticized by David Stern and others, then writers for MMA websites should be allowed to be critical of the flagship organization, even in wrongheaded and misguided ways.

Boxing writers are rightfully criticizing the Mayweather-Pacquiao Debacle, and their love for the sport isn’t being challenged. Although boxing doesn’t have a figurehead as prominent and as galvanizing as Mr. White, I doubt that even Don King in his heyday would bust out the old “with us or against us” rhetoric, merely because a few writers are calling bullshit on Dana’s hyperbole. Right now there is a lot being written about the Death of Print Media by members of the online and print media alike; does writing about the decline of a business that “helps pay [one’s] bills” seem terribly unreasonable?

And Ten Years is a REALLY short amount of time. Without predicting abject failure, an intelligent analyst could say that due to the structure of the sport, and its positioning as a niche sport geared towards 18-34 year old males, in an media environment that is getting more and more squeamish about violence and head trauma, MMA will see its growth plateau somewhere along the way, compared to a sport like futbol/soccer, which is entrenched in more countries, has more infrastructure in this country, and FAR less of a potential for backlash. Again, while it is Dana’s job to prove the analysts wrong, not the MMA press’ job to fall in behind him, risking their credibility in the process.

Let’s not forget that UFC 100, the supposed watershed moment for the sport in North America (which saw media coverage converge into a full-blown media event) ended up doing more for Brock Lesnar than it did the UFC, as it reinforced the notion that the stars mean more than the brand. Lesnar’s prolonged absence, as well as that of other superstars, has demonstrated that even a well-received UFC event only provides a minor buyrate “bump” without big stars in the main event. Other sports have already developed built-in infrastructure designed to compensate stars in proportion to their worth, so it is surely reasonable to predict an upcoming UFC labor crisis, as the fighters recognize their drawing power. With this and other issues on the horizon, Dana can’t hope that his tactics will lead to the MMA media taking his side against fighters who don’t demand favorable coverage as an explicit condition for access, or against networks and sponsors that are skeptical about working with a control freak like White.

You’re correct in saying that Dana & Co didn’t put together a crappy card, and that circumstances beyond their control hurt it, but that doesn’t change the fact that promoting this card requires more than the old “there’s a UFC this month, and it’s gonna be HUGE” rhetoric. Rashad Evans vs. Thiago Silva is a neat fight, much like Forrest-Tito was a neat fight, but it doesn’t scream Main Event, because there’s nothing at stake to rope in casual fans. Essentially, it’s a tuneup fight for Rashad vs. Rampage, a big time fight that has been promoted for over six months. As a promoter, Dana should be trying to figure out ways to get his fighters out there, firing up their respective fanbases, and making the card appear relevant, rather than just the latest attempt to separate fans from their money in this uncertain economy.

However, an MMA website can’t be as relentless and single-minded as Dana needs to be to succeed. They have to cover various angles and perspectives, to satisfy the voracious appetites of MMA fans. Some want features on fighters and their training methods, some want technical breakdowns of fights, while still others want to hear about ratings, buyrates, salaries, acquisitions and releases. Jake Rossen, Sherdog’s “blogger,” writes four or five pieces a day, most of which are half-baked and forgettable. The rest of their writing staff may or may not share Rossen’s perspective, and indeed some may agree with White that there’s no ceiling to MMA’s growth, but others still might be taking a “wait and see” approach. This has nothing to do with how much someone “loves” the sport. I might love The Hurt Locker, but simultaneously think that anyone who says it will make as much money as Avatar is out of their bloody mind. I might love Avatar, but think that the criticisms of the movie as another Pocahontas movie are valid. So it doesn’t surprise me that we don’t see James Cameron, who sank millions of his own money into the production, go off on profane rants about critics who don’t promote his movie. At least not in public.

So maybe that’s the issue, not that Dana feels this way — that’s his prerogative — but that he goes public with the attitude, in the hopes that his opinion will sway the media. And yet, in a lot of ways, it does.