When WWE Radio was announced on July 23, much of the immediate reaction online centred on one concern: what would happen to impartiality?
Partnering with radio giant SiriusXM, the biggest pro wrestling company in the world has invested in another form of media. The new channel will feature WWE-produced podcasts hosted by the likes of Cody Rhodes, Stephanie McMahon and The Undertaker. SiriusXM is also home to one of the biggest wrestling talk shows, Busted Open Radio.
Many of the shows are hosted by Bully Ray, Natalya, Mark Henry, Sam Roberts and Peter Rosenberg, all of whom are associated with WWE one way or another. Roberts and Rosenberg are often seen on pre and post-show panels, Ray and Henry are under legends deals, and Natalya is an active star on the roster. The concern is not that WWE directly controls every programme on SiriusXM. The concern is that the company is now entering into a major partnership with a platform that already hosts one of the biggest wrestling talk shows in the world. Interestingly, AEW wrestler Thunder Rosa, a regular contributor to Busted Open Radio, was not mentioned in the announcement. That may be completely innocent, but it does raise questions about how much space talent from other promotions will receive on a platform now partnering with WWE.
Host Dave LaGreca has publicly said that nothing will change, but many are sceptical, including me. This is a different WWE from the one many of us grew up watching. The company is no longer just a wrestling promotion; it is an increasingly powerful media company with television deals, streaming partnerships, podcasts and now its own radio platform. In an increasingly competitive media landscape, every company is fighting for attention. The question is whether WWE’s growing influence will also affect the people responsible for analysing it.
Yes, there are examples of a disconnect between the permanently online fans and those who spend their hard-earned money on tickets and merch. Jey Uso may be the most detested WWE star on X, but the fans in arenas will happily join in with the Yeet-ing. Danhausen remains divisive online, but merch sales tell a different story. However, on occasions where topics need to be addressed, will the ones with an extended reach actually speak up?
The most recent episode of Raw is a great example. Two hours and 15 minutes of TV time, not one women’s match. During the episode, IYO SKY was used as part of a storyline involving Danhausen and Liv Morgan, but the show still featured no actual women’s match. That is a perfectly reasonable criticism of WWE’s booking, particularly given the amount of time available. However, how much attention did this criticism receive from the biggest wrestling talk shows?
That raises a question: do these shows want to provide completely independent analysis, or do they have to consider whether criticism could jeopardise their next guest or future relationship? Also, with Busted Open being one of the biggest wrestling shows in the world, how much wrestling from the other companies will actually be covered moving forward? Will a bad AEW show receive more coverage than a great one because criticism is easier to provide when there is no professional relationship to protect?
WWE could book the show better, pay attention to the fans or even move along the storylines faster. The concern is that WWE is increasingly placing itself in a position where the people with the biggest platforms also have professional relationships with the company they are supposed to analyse. Yes, there will always be independent analysis on YouTube, social media and websites. However, those voices are often dismissed as ‘marks’, despite the fact that many of them are the very fans who ultimately buy the tickets, merchandise and subscriptions that keep the wrestling industry going.
I am fully aware that the obvious response to this article is that I am a small-site writer criticising people with decades of experience in wrestling. That is true. But experience in the wrestling business does not automatically make someone incapable of bias, just as being an outsider does not automatically make someone’s criticism invalid. If anything, having a relationship with the company being discussed can create its own potential conflict of interest.
Fans have previously argued that Busted Open is leaning more heavily into WWE coverage, a perception that could amplify in the coming months. Jim Ross recently compared listening to the show to listening to ‘multiple WWE commercials’, although he also acknowledged that he is biased towards AEW. That admission is important, because it highlights the wider question: can anyone with a close relationship to a wrestling company ever be completely impartial?
If there’s another Goldberg vs. Undertaker disaster or, God forbid, another scandal, how much will really get covered? This is the same question fans ask when a streamer appears on WWE television and then offers strong opinions about the company. Is that opinion completely independent, or is there now a professional relationship to consider?
WWE Radio: The Bottom Line
At the end of the day, there is an argument that none of this really matters. Like anything, if fans don’t like it they can switch off. There are more than enough shows and podcasts talking about wrestling, some tailor-made to what the fan is looking for. However, this could be a major blow when it comes to independent journalism.
The question is not whether WWE should be criticised. Of course it should. The question is whether the people with the biggest platforms will still feel comfortable criticising WWE when their careers, relationships and future opportunities are increasingly connected to the company.
Featured image: WWE
