Paid Members IANdrewDiceClay Posted April 13, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted April 13, 2011 From WWE's information sheet taken from F4W: We noted last week the irony of "Wrestling" being removed from the company name on the weekend of WrestleMania, and in the past we've noted other terms that Vince McMahon finds undesirable. "Belt," for instance, is not allowed. Superstars do not win belts. They win championships. For a while he didn't even want the superstars to wear the championships around their waists, because, well, you wear a belt around your waist and this isn't your father's pro-rasslin where folks wear title belts. This week we are going to look at a list of banned terms. Every now and then you'll hear "wrestling" uttered on WWE television, at which point some people will say this is proof that there aren't really any set rules about what you can and cannot say, and that perhaps people like Dave Meltzer and I are making this up. As a matter of fact, WWE has an information sheet that they send all over the world to folks who do international voice-overs in other countries, and it includes a list of "Incorrect Terminology," which is further identified as being incorrect via a bright red "X," and an accompanying list of "Correct Terminology," which is accompanied by a happy green check mark. The information sheet, titled, "The Language of WWE," reads in full:  The Language of WWE  World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) is a publicly traded entertainment company (NYSE: WWE) that creates and delivers a weekly action soap opera to its passionate fans.  WWE has been a recognized leader in entertainment for more than 25 years and has developed into one of the most popular and sophisticated forms of global entertainment today.  As a global entertainment brand, the language that we use when communicating on WWE is critical.  Please ensure that you are familiar and employing the below, effective immediately.  Let's take a look at these terms, shall we?  "Wrestling" or "Catch" is prohibited. Several European countries still use the 19th-century term "catch" to describe the art of pro-wrestling and "catchers" to describe wrestlers. Catch (as in "catch-as-catch-can") was a style of submission-based grappling practiced in Lancashire, England and later brought to the United States by immigrants in the mid-1800s. Many of the terms used up through the '90s, including "collar-and-elbow tie-up," have their roots in catch, and several MMA stars today, perhaps most notably Josh Barnett, claim their submission style is catch wrestling. "The Language of WWE" states that the following phrases are incorrect: "Wrestling is broadcast in 145 countries," or "Catch is broadcast in 145 countries." The correct terminology is: "WWE is broadcast in 145 countries."  "Sports" is incorrect. What is allowed is "Entertainment or Action Soap Opera." "Eg: WWE is exciting entertainment," or "WWE is an exciting action soap opera." It should be noted that "action soap opera" in the above example is also printed in bold, presumably to make sure that there is no confusion.  "Catchers or Wrestlers." Definitely banned. Incorrect examples are "Catchers are unique characters" or "Wrestlers are unique characters." You may only say "WWE Superstars." "Eg: WWE Superstars are unique characters." As is their Chairman.  "Athletes or Sportsmen." Banned. I will admit, I was surprised to learn that "athlete" is a banned term, if only because for years and years I have heard wrestlers and fans say, "It might be fake, but these guys are tremendous athletes." No longer can you say, for example, "WWE Superstars are brilliant athletes," or "WWE Superstars are brilliant sportsmen." Nope. You must call them, and I am not making this up, "Entertainers with tremendous athletic prowess." They even give an example: "WWE Superstars are entertainers with tremendous athletic prowess." What normal person in their right mind would ever utter a sentence such as that?  "Fight." Not allowed. You cannot say, "WWE's first fight of the night." You may say, "Match" or "Bout." "Eg: WWE's first match of the night" or "WWE's first bout of the night."  "Fighting." "The fighting was enthralling" is ixnayed. OK, however, is the term "action." "Eg: The action was enthralling."  The printout concludes with the following three "Key Soundbytes":  * WWE is pure entertainment  * WWE is an action soap opera  * WWE Superstars are entertainers with tremendous athletic prowess Now go off and learn it all and I expect us all to use these terms in our UKFF postings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Merzbow Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 When was the last match to be called a street SPOILER - Highlight the black box to read fight "match"? I honestly can't remember that term being used in an age. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheLostScot Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 What the fuck is the big deal with wrestling? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paid Members JNLister Posted April 13, 2011 Paid Members Share Posted April 13, 2011 Not sure of the timing, but WWE now uses No Holds Barred for the rules that were historically Street Fight (ie no DQ, no count out.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The King Of Swing Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I can understand rebranding and branching out but the levels that Vince and company go to distance themsels from "wrasslin" is just rediculous imo and anyway does anyone seriously use the term "catch" amymore? Â Honestly I'm a 20+ year WWF/E fan and its becomming harder by the year for me to stick with the company but perhaps its just age finally catching up with me and the WWE just isn't for me anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators PowerButchi Posted April 13, 2011 Moderators Share Posted April 13, 2011 Instead of "Fighting" or "Wrestling" they should use the terminology me and my mates used to use as kids. "Owen Hart is playing Savio Vega". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mdh85 Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 WWE certainly is a global entertainment brand. Â The format of its entertainment shows create drama by mimicking the conventions of a SPORTS broadcast. Specifically, a WRESTLING card. Wrestling IS WWE's brand. It is their USP in an over-crowded entertainment market. Â Devaluing that USP by removing all references to it and its associated terminology, in favour of generic, empty terms like "Entertainment", which can be readily applied to all of their competitors as well is madness bordering on self parody, and makes absolutely no business sense. That's without even going into the post-modern nightmare that referring to wrestlers as "Entertainers" during the shows creates. Yes, they are entertainers - but as far as the show's internal logic is concerned, they're competitive sportsmen trying to beat each other into submission! Not ENTERTAIN EACH OTHER TO DEATH! Â I could rant on all night, but to be honest I don't even know where to start, and I'd be cracking a nut with a sledgehammer by trying to argue against this shit using logic. I hope Kevin Dunn's pleased with himself. He's still never going to win a fucking Emmy. Â Edit: Butch - I swear to God Michael Cole actually referred to the Snooki match as "featuring six players" on SmackDown! while shilling WrestleMania a couple of weeks ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Rog Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 http://www.freewebs.com/07sd//Championship...ampionship2.jpg  this means a new belt/championship is needed as it features the dreaded W word Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Pitcos Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Not sure of the timing, but WWE now uses No Holds Barred for the rules that were historically Street Fight (ie no DQ, no count out.) I hate the No Holds Barred gimmick, because it has no relevance in this day and age. Nobody gets up in arms about "illegal move!" The No Holds Barred stip now is just legalisation of chairs and sledgehammers and the like, so I much prefer calling it a Streetfight or No DQ match. WWE has often rotated the use of those terms though, presumably in an attempt to over use the match without overexposing it. Â I thought the (now outdated) banned word lists had come out ages ago as well. I remember reading a good couple of years or so back about new commentators being baffled by the words on the list. Â I've noticed quite a few mentions of "fight" on WWE lately, and wondered if that was a word they were phasing in. I'd love JR to be around long enough to start calling some bland fucker "the best pure entertainer with tremendous athletic prowess in WWE." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The King Of Swing Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 I remember reading a year or so back that the words "belt" and "strap" were banned when talking about any Title's in the WWE. Â I used to believe that Vince would wake up in a bad mood and just randomly ban things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Polish Dad Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Some of that makes sense. It definitely makes sense to say that WWE is broadcast in 145 countriesd rather than just 'wrestling', because WWE is their brand. The same as calling their wrestlers Superstars/Divas as a way to set them apart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dex316 Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 World Wrestling Entertainment (WWE) is a publicly traded entertainment company (NYSE: WWE) that creates and delivers a weekly action soap opera to its passionate fans. Â This story is clearly bull (or the note is out of date). We're not fans...we're THE UNIVERSE Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Superplex Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 My understanding is that a lot of the rebranding to WWE Inc and the move away from all the other wrestling terminology in the last few years was in order that WEE not be classed as a sport and therefore move them away from the scope of the world doping agencies and allow them to run their own wellness policy with out any requirement for independent governance. The way this is evolving one has to wonder how far we are from Wrestlemania being rebranded to "Sports Entertainier" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freaky Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Sky had better find a new channel to host WWE TV over here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The King of Old School Posted April 13, 2011 Share Posted April 13, 2011 Sky had better find a new channel to host WWE TV over here. Â SkyLiving would be ideal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.