The Bleeding Edge: How a 1995 WCW Firing Foreshadows Today’s Risk Aversion in Entertainment
The world of professional wrestling, often perceived as bombastic and over-the-top, is surprisingly sensitive to public perception. A recent discussion on the 83 Weeks podcast, featuring Eric Bischoff and Barry Darsow (The Blacktop Bully), unearthed a stark reminder of this: Darsow’s 1995 firing from WCW, alongside Dustin Rhodes, for the cardinal sin of…bleeding in a match. While seemingly a relic of a bygone era, this incident isn’t just a historical footnote; it’s a crucial case study in how escalating risk aversion is reshaping the entertainment landscape, and a warning for creatives across all mediums.
The Night the Blood Flowed, and Careers Were Put on Hold
Darsow recounted a seemingly straightforward conversation with Bischoff the morning after a match. “Eric says to me, ‘Barry, I got good news and I got bad news for you.’…The bad news? ‘You’re fired.’…Fired for what? ‘Well, you guys bled in that match.’ The office did not want that.” (h/t to 411mania.com for the transcription). The directive came down from “Corporate,” and despite Bischoff’s initial promise to rehire Darsow, the incident highlighted a growing pressure to sanitize the product. This wasn’t about wrestling aesthetics; it was about external pressures and a fear of negative publicity.
From Wrestling Rings to Streaming Services: A Pattern of Censorship
The WCW situation wasn’t isolated. Bischoff explained that Vince McMahon actively lobbied against WCW’s use of blood, not just with Turner executives, but directly with members of Congress. This aggressive tactic underscores a broader trend: the weaponization of public concern to influence creative content. Fast forward to today, and we see echoes of this in the constant debates surrounding content moderation on social media, the self-censorship prevalent in streaming services fearing backlash, and the increasing pressure on video game developers to remove potentially controversial elements. The core issue remains the same: a perceived need to protect audiences – and brands – from anything deemed potentially offensive or damaging.
The Corporate Influence: A Shifting Power Dynamic
Bischoff’s regret centers on not challenging the “Corporate” mandate. He notes that for a period, WCW enjoyed relative autonomy, but the bleeding issue became a non-negotiable point of contention. This illustrates a critical power dynamic: the increasing influence of corporate entities over creative decisions. Historically, creatives often had more leeway, operating with a degree of artistic freedom. Now, risk management and brand safety frequently take precedence. This isn’t limited to entertainment; it’s impacting journalism, education, and even scientific research, where funding can be contingent on adhering to specific narratives.
The Rise of “Safe” Content and the Erosion of Authenticity
The demand for “safe” content, while understandable from a risk mitigation perspective, carries a significant cost: the erosion of authenticity. The very elements that often make entertainment compelling – conflict, vulnerability, and even a degree of transgression – are being systematically sanitized. This isn’t necessarily about eliminating genuinely harmful content; it’s about preemptively removing anything that *might* be perceived as such. The result is a homogenization of content, a lack of genuine risk-taking, and a growing sense of creative stagnation. Consider the prevalence of reboots and sequels over original ideas – a clear indication of studios prioritizing guaranteed returns over innovative storytelling.
Mike Graham: The Unacknowledged Catalyst
Interestingly, Bischoff later admitted he should have fired Mike Graham, the individual who instructed Darsow and Rhodes to bleed during the match. While he initially believed he *had* fired Graham, the realization that he hadn’t highlights a common leadership failing: avoiding accountability for those who initiate problematic behavior. This speaks to a larger issue of systemic responsibility. It’s not enough to simply react to a crisis; organizations must address the root causes and hold individuals accountable for their actions.
Looking Ahead: Navigating the New Era of Creative Constraints
The WCW firing, viewed through a modern lens, serves as a cautionary tale. The entertainment industry, and indeed all creative fields, are facing increasing pressure to conform to ever-narrowing standards of acceptability. The key to navigating this new era isn’t necessarily to fight against all constraints – some are legitimate and necessary – but to proactively manage risk, foster open communication, and champion creative freedom within defined boundaries. As Bischoff himself acknowledged, he was “learning on the job.” Today’s leaders must learn from the past and prioritize both innovation and responsible content creation. The future of entertainment depends on it.
What steps can creatives take to balance artistic expression with the demands of a risk-averse environment? Share your thoughts in the comments below!
