Can UFC Mag Be Respectable?
By Josh Stein on Jun 30, 2009
The more I hear discussion about the UFC magazine, the more I think to myself: How can I take them seriously?
I suppose it’s unfair to judge, not having taken a serious look at the magazine yet, but it seems, at least to me, that there is something intellectually (and otherwise) dishonest about the UFC choosing to publish a piece of media and pretend its a serious piece of journalism. It’s not exactly fair for me (hardly a Bob Woodward) to go off on a rant about journalist ethics, but it does present a nice opportunity to make a point about the nature of promoting in any combat sport (not just MMA, but since this is an MMA website, might as well use those promoters as an example).
The nature of promoting is selling a product. Dana White has to be the Billy Mays of MMA, selling his fighters to the fans so that they’ll buy the pay-per-view. This is the grain of salt I take with whatever Dana says. He’s a promoter, there are statements that are obligatory (i.e. the Jon Fitch debacle and his criticisms of Fedor). I don’t criticize Dana for doing things that are a part of his profession, though no one (myself included) takes him seriously when he goes off of the boat on one of his former fighters the way he did with Fitch, or pretends to hate one of the best fighters in the world while pushing a former professional wrestling and a recovering accident victim who was (at the time) 3-2 in his last five fights.
The nature of Dana White’s profession is theater, and sometimes he overacts. The problem, though, is that if the UFC magazine is going to be any more than an extended sales pitch or an indulgence of his narcissism (and putting himself on the cover is not a good start), he needs to give it some autonomy and some distance from the organization.
I’m not saying that the UFC magazine needs to be hyper-critical (or critical at all) of the UFC, but it can’t be what FOX News is to the Right and MSNBC is to the Left in the political arena. The pro-UFC audience may be willing to buy Dana’s sales pitches, the casual fans might be willing to support a UFC publication, but it needs to be able to honestly cover the organization its dealing with.
So much of the print news produced with respect to MMA is crap (there’s no better term for it, so I apologize to the language-sensitive). It’s not well written, it’s not intellectually honest and it’s not interesting (and you have to cover at least two of those three bases, in my opinion, if you want people to buy magazines). There are a handful of good publications, but setting aside my biases towards a handful of magazines, if the UFC wants to move in on that magazine market, it’s not as though there’s a ton of high-budget competition, and certainly extending a print deal with the already numerous UFC sponsors could be a great method for making money, but it needs to be credible.
Why?
Because no one owns the market on MMA print news, and the establishment of a publication that can be a positive force in the sport is a big deal, and the UFC has the possibility to legitimize print coverage. Unfortunately, as with so much of MMA promotion, the chances of a credible magazine coming out from under the oversight of an incredibly protective and biased (though, understandably, as their bias is in favor of themselves) Zuffa management seems incredibly unlikely, but this is MMA and anything can happen.
Filed Under: MMA
Comments (8)
Get 1 Now
Get Free Gear
The blogs reporting MMA is not something to brag about. Outside of presenting the UFC brand in a favorable light, I don’t really see what you mean by saying the magazine should “honestly cover the organization its dealing with.”
I’m also thinking about other sports magazines like ESPN, SI, Ring, WWE and FIGHT! What makes them a positive or negative force for the respective niche sports or sports coverage? What makes them legitimate or not?
Overall I just don’t see a problem with the UFC rag outside of the cover. White has been on the cover of a number of magazine already so the decision was not that bad.
ESPN, SI, Ring and Fight are all, to the best of my knowledge, autonomous (WWE isn’t, but since it covers a staged sport anyway, the building of heroes and heels isn’t as relevant).
I explained my three criteria for magazines.
The legitimacy issue is an issue of whether I can read a magazine and look for insight instead of an advertisement for the upcoming pay-per-view.
That’s what SI does, and why it’s the leading sports magazine, and what it’s considered legitimate by its readership and the sporting community (though, much of their coverage of MMA has been half-assed, but that’s another issue).
White being on the cover is not a shock, but the fact that they’re giving him a cover on the brink of UFC 100 seems silly.
Notwithstanding the cover . . . the magazine is just as legitimate as any other MMA or sports magazine. Of course I’m not claiming that it is on par with SI or ESPN writing or journalistic credibility but I don’t see why it can’t be respected, notwithstanding the UFC President.
SI and ESPN often shoot themselves in the foot when it comes certain biases but that doesn’t surprise me. It’s going to be a long while before the MMA coverage is better than half-assed by all print media. Many journalist whether they write for Yahoo! Sports, SI, Sherdog or even Bloody Elbow allow some of their biases to color their editorial opinions and it oftem shows.
. . . I happen to like magazines, it is not bad, purchasing one issue is not going to hurt you.
Is it legitimate… yes. But it is limited in its scope. First the magazine is not an MMA magazine but a UFC magazine. Its like a Microsoft publication, it will give you everything Microsoft, but no Apple so it cannot be considered a computer magazine in its overall coverage. It will be lacking in its scope and coverage of fighters outside of the UFC, which will probably be non-existent or bias.
As far as Dana on the cover, Josh you are right 100%! Here is the most talked about and promoted UFC, let alone MMA event ever, and none of the fighters are on the cover? And to make matters worse it is not only Dana, but Dana in a fighters stance! This when guys like Frank Mir made $80,000 to beat Brock Lesnar? Or when you have guys making $8,000 for a fight? At least they could’ve had a picture of Royce Gracie and say Brock Lesnar or someone on the cover together.
And in more disturbing news (especially for Garrett) there are only 3 ring girls (plus Rachelle Lee)! Maybe they’ll search for new talent! Garrett could be the product tester!
Vee, I’ve got a copy of the magazine sitting on my table. My problem is, is this mag going to be used to say the kind of ridiculous things that a promoter would say, or is to going to be used to offer fans insider knowledge into the UFC. Somehow, I think the former is more likely than the latter.
Bill, I agree.
To me Bill said it exactly right. It’s not an MMA magazine it’s a UFC magazine. They are creating an extension to their brand that helps get out the message they want. I have no problem with them creating a magazine and then doing what they want with it.
Besides just like all media for the most part in this day and age journalistic quality and factual reporting takes a backseat. Nowadays ratings, demographics, and the ability to sell advertising to make money dictates how any kind of news gets reported on.
I kind of think that it would be obvious that the magazine would just cover strictly UFC fighters and events. I really doubt they’re going to hype up Affliction, Strikeforce, Dream or Bellator Fighting. But other than that, I really don’t think the magazine is going to be that much different from the other MMA rags outside of UFC-centered content. The first issue isn’t that much different from the other mags AND they did feature Dana on the cover in the past.
“They are creating an extension to their brand that helps get out the message they want.” Yeah, no doubt.
It is an extension of the UFC to do nothing more than hype fights and increase the number of PPV buys…