11 Misconceptions About WWE You Probably Believe
2. "Ruthless Agression" Was An Era
What's the more astonishing bit of marketing/brainwashing by WWE about the period of time between 2002 and 2008, when a deal with Mattel resulted in a sharp shift to PG and away from the excesses that had defined the company for decade at that pont?
Is it that the company successfully rebuilt itself back to the heady mainstream days of the Attitude Era on the strength of Triple H steering the ship through choppy waters until John Cena and Batista were made men? Or is it that this spell was known by everybody back then as the Ruthless Aggression Era? Both are parroted as truisms despite being provably false, and the latter also says something specific about how audiences were emotionally disconnecting in droves.
In a fairly desperate and grabby manner, Vince McMahon lined his rosters up like peons in 2002 to scream in their faces that they sucked despite his genius booking, and that only by having "Ruthless Aggression" could they get out of the funk. In contrast to the branding of the Attitude Era coming long after the vibe within the company had already shifted towards it, this was a naked attempt to replicate the reverse, and only really worked for a corny Cena promo during his debut against Kurt Angle.
Within weeks, the concept (?) was dropped and it was back to sagging business as usual for the default market leader.