Opinion: For Problematic UFC Stories, Honesty Should Be Best Policy

---

Editor’s note: The views and opinions expressed below are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Sherdog.com, its affiliates and sponsors or its parent company, Evolve Media.

Reza Madadi on Saturday at the 3Arena in Dublin returned to the Octagon for the first time in two and a half years. Ultimate Fighting Championship announcer John Gooden informed the viewing audience that Madadi hadn’t been in the UFC since he submitted Michael Johnson on April 6, 2013 but provided no clarification as to why -- beyond a vague reference to “personal difficulties.” Gooden and fellow commentator Dan Hardy noted that Madadi had engaged in a war of words with UFC Fight Night “Holohan vs. Smolka” opponent Norman Parke but never talked about why exactly the two lightweights were upset with each other. Gooden called Madadi “crazy” but added, “I mean crazy with affection.”

Watching the broadcast, you’d have no idea why Madadi was gone for so long, what he was doing while gone, why he had a dispute with Parke or why Gooden considered him a zany character in an affectionate way. These were all left as mysteries to the viewer, who if forced to guess would probably be left thinking Madadi was taking care of a sick family member.

Madadi was not taking care of a sick family member. He was gone from the UFC because he was serving 14 months in prison on an 18-month sentence after being found guilty of aggravated burglary in the robbery of $150,000 in merchandise from a store in Sweden. The tensions between Parke and Madadi were because Parke was bringing up this fact repeatedly in the pre-fight hype. It’s unclear why Gooden has affection for Madadi’s particular brand of craziness.

The point here is not to further reprimand Madadi or say that he shouldn’t be allowed to compete in the UFC, nor is the point to criticize UFC for giving him a second chance. He served his time and, at age 37, is running out of time to continue his career as a mixed martial artist. There’s something to be said for societal forgiveness. However, it’s high time and long overdue that the UFC treats its audience with more respect when it comes to addressing negative stories that are central to the fights that are being presented.

When Michael Vick returned from his dogfighting conviction, the NFL would have been raked over the coals if the announcers tried to pretend the incident never happened and just explained vaguely that he’d been gone a while and switched teams since the last time we saw him. The same goes for the NBA, if it made no reference to “Malice at the Palace” the next time Metta World Peace took the court. After Antonio Margarito was caught with plastered hand wraps, it became a central story to the rest of his boxing career.

There are many good reasons why these other sports organizations address those stories. To begin with, announcers need to maintain their credibility. This is particularly important for a sport like MMA, where revenue is driven by pay-per-view events. The announcers’ excitement about upcoming PPV attractions is central to convincing the audience that those events are worth ordering. They have a harder time accomplishing that goal if they are perceived to be company shills by the average viewer. UFC announcer credibility has sadly been on a slow decline since the days Joe Rogan was considered a straight shooter who would acknowledge other promotions and shoot down bulls--- like Travis Lutter being the Michael Jordan of Jiu-Jitsu.

Being honest with your customers is morally the right thing to do, but it’s also the best thing for business. If you’re dishonest about the facts, you’re less likely to be taken seriously when it comes to opinions about the greatness of a given fighter or the importance of an upcoming matchup. A catcher who frames pitches subtly is much more effective than one who wildly yanks every ball back into the strike zone.

UFC announcers don’t have to dwell on negative stories or attack the athletes in question. They should simply acknowledge what the fight is about. If a fighter is returning from a year-long stint in prison, that’s almost certainly the biggest story surrounding his fight. If a fighter has lost three straight and desperately needs a win, simply pointing to past wins and ignoring that reality is dishonest. It’s also insulting to the intelligence of the audience when fans can tell they’re being told an incomplete or misleading story.

Honesty about negative stories also often makes competition more interesting. Most people love a good redemption story. We become better people by acknowledging our mistakes and correcting them, not pretending they never happened. This is also relevant when it comes to talking about fight results. The UFC and its announcers all too often only highlight previous wins while ignoring previous losses, when fighters become more interesting and more human while trying to overcome past adversity. That’s the “Rocky” story, and it’s one from which the UFC regularly runs.

Perhaps the most important reason the UFC needs to be more forthright in acknowledging negative stories is to make it clear that it’s on the side of remedying problems within the sport rather than covering them up. This was a huge issue for Major League Baseball when steroid usage was at its peak, and it’s now an even bigger problem for the National Football League, which has been pilloried by media and fans for its handling of everything from concussions to the Ray Rice situation. Concussions are a serious problem in football, but the central reason the NFL agreed to a billion-dollar settlement with former players was not the concussions themselves but the fact that the NFL acted to cover them up.

When the UFC ignores domestic violence, criminality or drug usage among its fighters, it creates the impression that it’s not taking those problems seriously, even if it is. This is a particularly important point when it comes to performance-enhancing drugs. The UFC, to its credit, is spending a huge amount of money on an extensive drug testing program in an effort to clean up the sport. Yet when Vitor Belfort fought Chris Weidman for the middleweight title earlier this year and the central story to everyone watching was how much of a role performance-enhancing drugs had played in Belfort’s late-career surge, the UFC pretended the issue did not even exist. Meanwhile, Kevin Casey returned from a year-long suspension for drostanolone a few months ago, and the announcers mentioned his absence without a word explaining the drug failure.

This quiet avoidance is a broad trend. UFC announcers by and large ignore drug test failures when those fighters return to action, save for the rare case when Rogan decides to bring it up about Ali Bagautinov. It’s understandable that the UFC doesn’t want to dwell on the issue, but there’s no excuse for at least acknowledging it and moving on. These fighters don’t deserve to be protected. A big part of deterring future usage of performance-enhancing drugs is public shaming. How are fans supposed to be convinced that drug usage is being aggressively policed if the UFC goes out of its way on its own television to cover up for fighters who fail tests?

The UFC’s approach to broadcasting comes from a very clear place: Accentuate the positives and downplay the negatives. However, the promotion over time has gone too far in that direction. Greater transparency and honesty in the announcing department at this point would be a welcome shift, and it would not only benefit the viewers but in many respects the UFC and its announcers.