November 2, 2010 could be one of the biggest days in the history of the WWE. On that day, we'll find out if Linda McMahon is going to be the next U.S. Senator from Connecticut (yes, she still has to win the Republican primary on August 10th but she has out raised her opponents 5 to 1 and her lead is almost double of her nearest competitor. Only something drastic will cause her to lose the nomination). If Linda wins the general election in November and becomes a U.S. Senator, her husband, Vince and the WWE are probably going to enjoy some fantastic benefits that come along with having one of their "own" in the federal government. Yet, if she is elected, it could hurt the WWE more than it could benefit.
In June 2008, the WWE changed its TV Parental Guideline rating from TV-14 to PG. In the press, Linda described the change in an effort to keep fans from "cradle to the grave". From James Caldwell at PWTorch:
Appearing at the UBS Media Conference in New York City this afternoon, WWE CEO Linda McMahon described the company's strategy of getting kids hooked on the WWE product at a young age. This is especially true with the recent introduction of WWE Kids Magazine and wwekids.com to relate the WWE product to a younger demographic. Linda McMahon described it as a "from the cradle to the grave" strategy to build generational loyalty to the WWE brand.
Yet, most experts would say that the change from TV-14 to PG was less about a change in the company's strategy and more about Linda throwing her hat into the Connecticut Senate race a few months later. From John Danz, Jr., at NewsBlaze.com:
WWE changed their rating from TV-14 to PG in February of 2009 to so conveniently coincide with the owner's wife Linda's bid for Congress. There's my first problem - self-interest. They changed the rating to suit HER interests and not the interest of the millions and millions of fans that keep the company afloat and line Vince's pockets. Selfish, self-serving nonsense.
Is it a coincidence that the WWE changed their strategy to a more kid friendly approach around the same time Linda was announcing her candidacy for the U.S. Senate? No. In this day and age of politics, candidates will use and do whatever to win. Her opponents aren't going to point out that she ran one of the most successful entertainment companies in the world for over two decades. Instead, they are (and have) going to point out that she promotes sex, violence, drug use, etc. A change was needed so she could counter what was going to eventually going to come up. However, the change to a PG rating has upset experts and fans alike. From Inside Pulse Wrestling's Aaron Glazer:
Or perhaps, the problem is, as Raffi Shamir discusses, that the WWE is just getting too child friendly. There is a case to be made that any child watching cable television from 9pm -11pm is expecting a more risqué product than the WWE currently delivers. There is also the fact that the much-maligned Attitude Era drew more children than the WWE's current child-centered product currently does.
If Linda wins in November, don't expect the WWE to instantly change their strategy again because she is no longer running for a Senate seat. Most likely, what will happen is that the WWE will continue its kid friendly, PG approach until Linda leaves office. This is because in this today's politics, the 24 hour news cycle and the lovely sound bites that come with it will always leave Linda open to attacks if the WWE changes back towards what it was doing during the wildly entertaining and successful "Attitude Era". There is no way Linda is going to want to take questions from reporters about something controversial in the WWE while she is in the process of trying to pass a bill. Not to mention the trouble she would have trying to explain why the WWE changed back to TV-14 after she won and then why it changed back to PG again when reelection time came around.
So far, the change to a PG rating hasn't hurt the WWE. Sure, their TV ratings and PPV numbers are down, but they are still making money hand over fist with their merchandising, live events and other revenue streams. According to their 2010 first quarter reportings, they are up in almost every category compared to 2009, but that trend may not continue if they continue to sail along with the PG approach.
Consider this, according to Linda the new shift to PG was to make sure they had their fans from "cradle to the grave", but in fact, due to the decline in ratings since the "Attitude Era", one can make the argument that they are losing fans instead of keeping them. Subsequently, the same shift in strategy that might be gaining them younger viewers is going to be the same reason these viewers stop watching later in life. As pointed out by Cageside's AniMal34 yesterday, the WWE is already losing its older fans to MMA (mainly the UFC) and other outlets, because they are failing to involve storylines and characters that resonate with an older audience. While fans understand they are not going to be getting real fighting while watching the WWE, they still want something that isn't marketed directly to children. Consequently, Linda's "cradle to the grave" strategy may be more like "cradle to they're teenagers".
This means if Linda is the next Senator from the State of Connecticut, expect the same kid friendly WWE for at least the next six years, if not more, which may lead to a further decline in pro-wrestling.