Wwe’s Handling of the Chris Benoit Scandle

To What Extent, if Any, Had WWE Distanced Itself From Chris Benoit? How Had In-Ring Performances Been Affected? Chris Benoit, before his tragic death, was a world renowned, top card professional wrestler for mainstream professional wrestling company, World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE); formerly World Wrestling Federation (WWF). As WWE were broadcasting a tribute show in Benoit’s memory, news which addressed why the wrestler had passed began circulating. The answer to that question was indeed chilling and has led WWE to disassociating itself with their former icon and Benoit’s reputation hitting an all time low” (Ring Surf, 2009). Reports to this day reveal that, over a period of days, Benoit had choked his wife and smothered his son both to death, before taking his own life on June 2007. Previous to these events, WWE had always been under scrutiny. From the most respectable organizations, their content was deemed violent and sexist (Consoli and Torpey-Kemph, 1999).

Also, since Chairman, Vince McMahon jr, publicly stated that professional wrestling matches are booked with predetermined outcomes, a butterfly effect-like chain of other various emerging news stories slowly began to unravel. More of which attempted to reveal further secrets behind the wrestling industry; namely depicting the neglectful treatment of performers. When journalists found Benoit’s story they had plenty of choice on what to blame; drugs, roid rage, etc. However, everyone knew that the WWE must be at fault. Lachlan, et al. 2009) states that; “the popularity attained by professional wrestling makes its presence impossible to ignore and concerns about its potential influence difficult to avoid”. For these reasons the WWE is always under high risk surveillance by press and critics. On February 2006, in response to another high profile wrestler’s untimely death, the company put a wellness policy in place, which tests for banned substances and performs annual cardiac evaluations. The policy gained a positive reception and WWE looked to slowly disassociate itself from the reports that claimed to expose the wrestling industry.

After Benoit’s death, most were looking to the wellness policy for an explanation; the US House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform requested that WWE hand in any material regarding the wellness policy, which had always been dealt with privately. Ashamedly, WWE had shortly after, suspended 11 wrestlers for violation of the policy and from then on have taken more stern measures when dealing with violations. It was ultimately found, by the Sports Legacy Institute, that Benoit had a severe case of chronic traumatic encephalopathy; “his brain showed an advanced form of dementia” (ABC News, 2007).

ABC News (2007) quotes the neurosurgeon in question as saying that “while he can’t be certain that the brain damage caused Benoit’s actions, he believes it is the leading cause”. Contrastingly and rather unsurprisingly, WWE have said in a later statement; “Today’s attempt to explain that Chris Benoit’s murder of his family was possibly caused by some form of dementia as a result of alleged concussions is speculative” (USA Today, 2007). Representing his WWE; Vince McMahon, in an interview with CNN (2009), further claims that these findings “haven’t even been critiqued by other members of the scientific community”.

Regardless of the validity of the Sports Legacy Institute’s study; quick to dismiss the possibility of concussion, mental deterioration and any slight mistake or misconduct on the part of WWE, McMahon’s product falls under much more pressure. Continuing his interview, Vince McMahon defends that Benoit’s performances takes no responsibility for his actions. As a company constantly in the public eye, the WWE have banned chair shots to the head, but believe they have nothing more to answer for; “it’s what it is in the ring” he says.

Upon learning of the tragedy, Vince had immediately recorded a public follow up statement, to air just before their next tri-weekly broadcast. Among his sincere concern for those involved, he assures (Mr. Mcmahons’ speach about Chris Benoit, 2007); “the facts of this horrific tragedy are now apparent. Therefore… there will be no mention of Mr Benoit’s name tonight”. Referring to Vince McMahon’s CNN interview (2009), he explains “anyone who becomes a murderer, I mean, you want to disassociate yourself with that individual”… “Chris Benoit has not, and will not define the WWE”.

However, Vince McMahon and the WWE have since been under fire from wrestling fans and observers who inadvertently claim that through disassociation, the tragic incident involving Chris Benoit has defined how the WWE has grown and in many ways hidden over the years. There is a net wide view from smarks (smart fans), that in an attempt to disassociate Benoit from the company, WWE have allowed vital and simple aspects of pro wrestling’s performance art to go with him. An online fan posts; “Benoit German suplex banned from WWE? ” (Yahoo Answers, 2010) “No chops? (Balderson, 2010) WWE is NOT wrestling”, states another.

Certain professional wrestling moves, created a long time ago and already interwoven into the fabric of the industry, as with many other wrestlers, had over time become synonymous with Chris Benoit. I have conducted a content analysis study using two samples of WWE PPV events to explore; to what extent, if any, WWE’s disassociation from Chris Benoit has had an effect on the content of their wrestling matches and the performance of their contracted wrestlers. WWE has always walked a thin, interesting line concerning the content of professional wrestling among their programming.

Former professional wrestler, Laurence De Garis remarks the following, regarding the (then) WWF’s 1999 prospectus; “Interestingly, professional wrestling is nowhere to be found in the description. The WWF’s definition of itself represents a shift in business models away from a sports-based, live-events business and more toward a television show” (Sammond, 2005). Such motives give the impression that the WWE may have assumed they had nothing to lose by disassociating itself from Chris Benoit in such a manner. In the past few years” he explains, “there has been emphasis on “mic work” and acting ability, as a professional wrestler I am primarily interested in “having matches”, hopefully good ones”. “Sampling in content analysis is subject to the same concerns it would be in any quantitative study. It should be both representative and significant” (Rose, 2007). Within my study, I was comparing two different time periods within (arguably) a sports show; each sample I had taken had to be representative of a full year.

As Rose (2007) states; “which sampling method you choose – or which combination of methods – will depend on the implications of your research question”. My research question as posed is representative of the highest quality sample, so as to investigate what kind, if any care is put into influencing the show. The sports show I am researching has designated Pay-Per-View events near monthly throughout the year. I have therefore chosen to analyse four PPV’s per sample I have. This equates to 26 hours of analysis. “Coding means attaching a set of descriptive labels (or categories) to the images” (Rose, 2007).

The purpose of my study is to analyse how the relationship between Benoit and WWE has changed. As people have suggested that WWE has made an unnecessary effort to erase connotations of Benoit from any further matches, I have focused specifically on wrestling moves used regularly by Benoit. My analysis is categorised into three moves well used by Benoit and additionally three categories which document the use of any similar variation of those moves. These additional categories however are not as objective, as I have taken a subjective stance in determining whether they are to be counted or not.

As Hansen, Cottle, Negrine & Newbold (1998) iterate; “content analysis, of course, could never be objective in a ‘value-free’ sense of the word: it does not analyse everything there is to analyse in a text (no method could, nor would there be any purpose in trying)”. Many wrestlers in the WWE have similar move sets and no two matches are ever the same. What is evident from personal experience with the WWE is that the moves I have coded aren’t necessarily only used by Chris Benoit. “A more sophisticated analysis can be developed by exploring the relations between different coding categories” (Rose, 2007).

And as such, I had coded a further factoring category which would specify by which wrestler the move had been used; allowing me to see patterns in my results and explain further, any changes to how wrestlers are performing. Here are the written results, in chronological order of events, to accompany my graphs; emerging from the analysis I have conducted: Vengeance 2005 -Knife Edge Chop: 13. Michaels: 10, Jericho: 3 -Chop Variation: 3. Benjamin: 2, Christian: 1 -German Suplex: 3. Angle: 3 -Similar Belly to Back Suplex: 0 -“Crippler” Crossface: 0 -Crossface Variations: 2. Carlito: 1, Benjamin: 1 Survivor Series 2005 Knife Edge Chop: 26. Benoit: 4, Flair: 15, Michaels: 5, Masters: 2 -Chop Variation: 3. JBL: 2, Show: 1 -German Suplex: 4. Benoit: 4 -Similar Belly to Back Suplex: 0 -“Crippler” Crossface: 0 -Crossface Variations: 3. Booker: 1, Angle: 2 Royal Rumble 2006 -Knife Edge Chop: 61. Noble: 8, Flair: 8, Benoit: 23, Carlito: 1, Tatanka: 12, Murdock: 1, Michaels: 8 -Chop Variation: 4. Show: 3, Viscera: 1 -German Suplex: 5. Benoit: 4, Angle: 1 -Similar Belly to Back Suplex: 1. Benoit: 1 -“Crippler” Crossface: 1. Benoit: 1 -Crossface Variations: 3. Murdock: 1, Michaels: 1, Cena: 1 Wrestlemania (22) 2006 -Knife Edge Chop: 24.

Flair: 8, Benoit: 3, Stratus: 4, Michaels: 9 -Chop Variation: 2. Flair: 1, Finlay: 1 -German Suplex: 8. Benoit: 3, Angle: 5 -Similar Belly to Back Suplex: 0 -“Crippler” Crossface: 2. Benoit: 2 -Crossface Variations: 2. Cena: 2 24/06/07: Benoit’s death Summerslam 2008 -Knife Edge Chop: 0 -Chop Variation: 1. Kingston: 1 -German Suplex:0 -Similar Belly to Back Suplex: 0 -“Crippler” Crossface: 0 -Crossface Variations: 4. MVP: 1, Marella: 2, Cena: 1 Survivor Series 2008 -Knife Edge Chop: 5. Michaels: 5 -Chop Variation: 1. Kingston: 1 -German Suplex: 0 -Similar Belly to Back Suplex: 0 -“Crippler” Crossface: 0 -Crossface Variations: 1.

Cena: 1 Royal Rumble 2009 -Knife Edge Chop: 0 -Chop Variation: 9. Phoenix: 1, Finlay: 1, Kingston: 2, Show: 5 -German Suplex: 0 -Similar Belly to Back Suplex: 0 -“Crippler” Crossface: 0 -Crossface Variations: 2. JBL: 1, Cena: 1 Wrestlemania (25) 2009 -Knife Edge Chop: 21. Snuka: 1, Steamboat: 2, Jericho: 1, Flair: 5, Michaels: 12 -Chop Variation: 9. Snuka: 2, Steamboat: 3, Show: 4 -German Suplex: 0 -Similar Belly to Back Suplex: 0 -“Crippler” Crossface: 1. Michaels: 1 -Crossface Variations: 2. M Hardy: 1, Cena: 1 These findings draw a clear line in the sand from the date of Benoit’s death as to how he is to be treated in WWE.

Findings blatantly point to the Knife Edge Chop. Chris Benoit was relatively famous for this, and throughout my 2005-2006, pre death sample analysis, it was used 124 times. Whereas in my 2008-2009, post death sample analysis, almost no one on the roster was using it. Lack of this move however, did seem to be a business decision. At Wrestlemania 09; the WWE’s most prominent PPV of the year, veteran wrestler, Shawn Michaels had his retirement match. As such, out of respect for Michaels, it seems that Vince and the WWE had given him an exception to the otherwise enforced rule; as it is also prominent in Michaels’ repertoire.

It comes to mention that Wrestlemania also played host to several guest veterans; for whose match had also given exception to the rule, despite that one regular wrestler was involved in their match, also using the move. However I can’t disregard that which proves, overall, Knife Edge Chops and German Suplexes are being removed from WWE wrestling. Over the history of professional wrestling, these specific moves have been a must-have in almost every technical (particularly British) wrestler’s arsenal.

Nowadays WWE remains the powerhouse of the pro wrestling world; therefore many new and inexperienced companies will follow them by example and other rising wrestlers may eliminate these moves from their repertoire to present themselves as a more viable WWE acquisition. Thereby WWE are affecting, not just themselves but the entire industry. As said above, the WWE, and following that, many subsequent companies, are caring more about out of ring performance, marketability and self promotion. Sammond (2005) specifies; “Inside the world of professional wrestling, many veterans and old timers lament that the “art” of wrestling has disappeared”.

Whereas modern wrestling companies may in fact see this as progress. Eras and changes are frequent in wrestling, and most famously, the WWE. Only a few generations ago, “the wrestling business was a closely protected, closed society. Its secrets were strongly guarded” (Sammond, 2005). Changes can yet be caused by many things. Perhaps most popular; ‘The Attitude era’ was the result of one wrestler’s character push; Stone Cold Steve Austin. Upon realising that fans were responding to this archetypal rebel over other faces (fan favourites), the WWE responded with edgier material.

Though, this era inevitably saw its end when other factors came into play. The incident involving Chris Benoit however, had caused many to monitor WWE’s content. It is for this reason that the WWE has done its best to stay above any discreditable behaviour; taking any other action they feel necessary to remove themselves from under the microscope. Enter, the era of ‘PG’ [along with the smark boom]. I am very happy with the validity of my method. However there are certain things I would be able to research further to better present an answer.

Using the same methods, it would be useful to analyse both, recent WWE years and other wrestling companies. Investigating how much influence WWE does in fact have over pro wrestling, and how they are evolving. My findings indicate that WWE’s reaction has given reason to remove any reference from future competition. Although we can believe this is a fickle publicity decision, these statistics reiterate that Benoit will never be put back on his pedestal; “he’s going to be known as the family killer first and great wrestler second” (Balderson, 2010).