this post was submitted on 24 Jan 2024
385 points (97.5% liked)
Technology
59534 readers
3195 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
WWE? Lol they think that's must have TV?
5 billion for ten years? Lolol. Oh my sides. It's not even an acquisition. It's 500 million a year for fake wrestling.
I mean, as shitty as it is, there's a decent sized market for it. Probably worth it to them to overpay so much for it to hurt the current streaming provider, Peacock.
I think it's ignorant to call it "shitty" or "fake wrestling".
Pro-wrestling entertainment is a form of camp theater, like drag shows. It's an old, cherished artform with a wide, passionate audience that outsiders routinely dismiss because they don't get it.
I don't watch it. It doesn't appeal to me. But I know people who love it. I think it's largely class elitism that perpetuates the misconception that this form of performance art is somehow unrespectable. It's not, it's challenging, dangerous, physically demanding theater.
Edit: For those confused or skeptical, check out Super Eyepatch Wolf's captivating media analysis "The Undertaker: Long term story telling in wrestling"
I would call WWE shitty because of what they do to their performers. The performers are artists and deserve our respect tho.