Peacock Editing Content

Apologies if this topic already exists but reading that Peacock is starting to edit controversial moments from WWE Network content. These moments were apparently not edited on the Network. General thoughts and what would you expect Peacock to edit going forward?

I think this heads down an extremely slippery slope as I don’t know how so much of the Attitude Era can be on Peacock without it sparking backlash.

source: PEACOCK REMOVING QUESTIONABLE WWE CONTENT FROM OLDER EVENTS | PWInsider.com

2 Likes

They shouldn’t be editing anything. If you don’t like what you are licensing then don’t license it. It’s just another pathetic example of unnecessary censorship and cancel culture. If I already didn’t have enough reasons not to subscribe, this would be another.

2 Likes

It sounds like the Peacock rollout is going to be a mess for a while. I can’t imagine not having the ability to pause a live PPV - that is like 1990s quality.

As for what they edit, I’m sure it will be a lot. Off the top of my head all the Kerwin White and Muhammad Hassan stuff, HHH in blackface (twice), Katie Vick, HLA, the Mexicools and Michael Cole/Heidenreich “alone time”.

1 Like

Bearing in mind WWE almost certainly agreed to these edits when they signed the deal then it’s self-censorship rather than just censorship, even revisionism via self-censorship if you like. As long as they’re not trying to pretend these things didn’t happen, then whatever. If they want to edit things out of the future broadcasts of their own product then…OK. How’s that any different to the general editing of any re-broadcasting of an event or show from the past? When you go and look at the Wiki page for the event, read, listen to reviews etc etc it will tell you what actually happened compared to the version you watched and you can go watch it “uncut” if you like. This is completely normal.

If this is “cancel culture” now too, i can’t wait for people to start whining about Chris Benoit etc. being cancelled. “I can’t believe Vince McMahon cancelled this wrestler because he murdered his family! When did Vince become such a liberal snowflake!?”.

All these decades of WWE editing their own product to blatantly remove things they don’t want is now “censorship” and “cancel culture”. What Peacock is doing is no different to what WWE have always done, in fact it wouldn’t be surprising if WWE are actively involved and were planning to go back over all their material and do this directly.

8 Likes

I can’t see how they post all the violence against women and don’t have groups calling it it to be taken down. Same with some of the obvious rave baiting stuff. I think that’s just the age we live in and does Comcast want to fight that fight or just edit WWEs history. It’s odd because surely they knew they were acquiring controversial footage so while I agree editing was part of the agreement I do wonder how long til parents are freaking out what their kids are finding on Peacock.

Oh, and I also think some of the stuff should totally be edited, some of the stuff already was being edited…I think more thought provoking for me is now that Peacock essentially licensed all this content, it’ll be interesting to see how they use and what, if any, backlash comes out of it towards them, since largely WWE is left alone and much more niche as a stand-alone network. As part of a one of the premier streaming platforms I wouldn’t be shocked if this troubled past comes back to haunt in some kind of way.

1 Like

Think you’ve just created a new game, I’m thinking:

DX parodying The Nation
Jim Ross in the Doctor’s Sugery (Pulling things out his Ass)
Kiss My Ass Club
Trish humilation segment (Not sure if that’s cut already)

2 Likes

It absolutely is. Editing content regardless of who is doing in an attempt to revise history because some people are now offended by it is pathetic and just panders to the lowest common denominator who can’t view something in context. Editing unpalatable content arguably does more damage, as it doesn’t bring attention to the subject and provoke debate about it and create an opportunity to learn from it.

Using your Chris Benoit example, pretending he never wrestled doesn’t erase what he did. I’m able to appreciate his matches without it meaning I don’t find what he did utterly horrific. The modern phenomenon of people constantly looking for things to be outraged at rather than employing critical thinking in relation to said things is just another example of the intellectual decline of society.

3 Likes

So should they just not air the content at all? This idea that content needs to remain forever available and unchanged is a wholly modern phenomenon.

2 Likes

No, they should air it. If they wish to restrict access to certain age groups then that is what parental controls are for.

And the idea that content should not be available and/or be changed to make it meet current standards is a wholly modern phenomenon.

2 Likes

This is actually a great idea. Here’s a few more recent examples I nominate for censorship/removal:

Fiend vs. Rollins HIAC
Eye for an Eye
Every Saudi show

7 Likes

If you want to censor/remove shit wrestling then there would be very little content from 2002 onwards.

It happened. Obviously “times have changed” but the past still happened. It’s quite pathetic to start altering the past just because the standards of today are different. You’d have to be a complete idiot to watch things from the past and not keep in mind that it’s from a different time but the types of people that like to go back and complain about things that have no relevancy now are idiots and these massive companies are shit scared of them. They think the vocal minority represent most people when that really isn’t the case. If you know the content was “problematic” in the past, then don’t watch it.

Wrestling’s desperation for mainstream acceptance and family friendly PR is why it won’t be good anytime soon. Not saying the content has to be the same as it was in the past but they need to focus more on wrestling rather than the sterile, corporate idea of being acceptable for mainstream viewing. It’s wrestling. It’s not going to grow as a children’s show.

Fingers crossed people don’t have a halfwoke light go off in their heads when it comes to 90s Hip Hop. All of that is still okay right…?

3 Likes

The extremely fake, poorly delivered, and cringeworthy Nia Jax speech about bullying being bad, which went down well with fans…, seems like prime content for Peacock to be honest. And there’s that moment they made the women’s division look stupid when they had them hug and cry after announcing the women’s royal rumble. Stupid in wrestling terms but valuable content in PR terms. What an era.

1 Like

Why should anyone be forced to air anything? As I said this is an entirely new thing where all things ever made must continually be available because reasons.

3 Likes

To the people bitching, Peacock paid a billion dollars they can do whatever they want with it. Why do fans care more about WWE’s past than WWE itself?

WWE and Vince sold out, they don’t care so why should we?

2 Likes

That can also easily be turned into “stop bitching, it’s their company, they can do what they want”…

This is a wrestling forum. People comment on whatever’s happening regarding wrestling.

1 Like

I feel like this is really being blown out of proportion. To say this is “cancel culture” is a bit hyperbolic, though if you wanted to argue that this is being done because in 2021 people are more sensitive and things are more PC, I can’t say you are wrong.

Ultimately WWE has the right to edit whatever the hell they want. If they worry that certain content will get negative attention, then they have a right to edit it out. I would put money on it that the majority of the stuff edited out wouldnt even be watched by the people kicking and screaming about it.

Same here, and I really can’t blame them. Violence against woman is one thing if its done in a context where the clear message is that the man doing it is in the wrong, and the woman is the clear cut victim (think the movie “enough” with Jennifer Lopez) its another thing when man hitting/spanking the woman is being portrayed as the protagonist, and the woman being hit is thought of as “deserving it”. Its also such a bad look to have the fans cheering for it, and in some cases calling the woman a “whore” or “slut” etc.

The stuff being edited out is also probably stuff like HLA, Heidenrich threatening to rape Michael Cole, Katie Vick etc. Does anyone really care?

1 Like

Let me ask you this…do you want to go back and watch the stuff that is likely being edited out? If it wasn’t edited, would you watch it?

3 Likes

The other thing is if you really want to find any of the things deleted, so much of it can be found on YouTube or elsewhere online. Probably a lot more user friendly than the Network or Peacock…

With it being edited, will that make people that would’ve complained about it actually watch it now…? Who’s asking for a clean version of the Attitude Era? People that don’t want to watch anything controversial but still want to say they’re fans of something controversial?

The reason people get annoyed by things like this is because of principle. It’s unnecessary censorship and also a sign of how content will be created and vetted going forward. It’s especially a problem when it’s being done by people that don’t actually care about the content. Wanting or not wanting to view it is largely irrelevant in situations like this by either side.

And if people go back and view something and they find out it’s an edited version, they then try and find an unedited version. They don’t think “thank god I’m being protected”. I guess NBC just don’t want their name attached to it but it’s watered down content.

2 Likes