Sports cards.1

Prestige Prestigious

---

---

Which championship (that is not a world title) in Pro Wrestling (any promotion) is the most prestigious?

---

---

As stated on the question, World Titles from every promotion do not count. Therefore, which championship from which promotion holds the most prestige? What made that championship so prestigious (name the main match/feud and year it was at it's peak)? Please explain your answers.

Thanks,
The Perfect Storm
Correction: (name the main match/feud and the year the title was at it's peak of being prestigious)

The NWA Missouri Heavyweight Championship was the secondary singles championship in the National Wrestling Alliance's St. Louis Wrestling Club and Central States Wrestling promotions in the 1970's and 1980's. It was usually dominated by the area's top star, Harley Race, and as such it was considered a "stepping stone" to the NWA World Heavyweight Championship (although only Race, Terry Funk, Kerry Von Erich and Ric Flair made it; Gene Kiniski and Dory Funk, Jr. were already former World Champions upon winning the Missouri title).

Hublot opens flagship store in Singapore

---

---

Swiss luxury watch brand Hublot, Official Watchmaker of Formula 1™, and Asia’s leading specialist watch retailer The Hour Glass officially opened the doors of the Hublot flagship store in Singapore on Friday.
Prestigious Prestige - Modern Warfare 2 Rant!

---

---

Prestige? The President, the Peace Prize and the Puzzled Press

There is a theory in the study of mass media communications that intrigued me as a graduate student. It was a study by Maxwell McCombs and Donald Shaw entitled “The Agenda-Setting Function of Mass Media.” In essence, it suggests a correlation between the weight given a particular story or issue in television news, newspapers and newsmagazines and the public’s idea of how important that story is.

I’ve been thinking about this quite often while reading and viewing recent news reports regarding the President of the United States, Mr. Obama.

There has been nothing less than dumbfounded shock by media writers, broadcasters and pundits at the announcement that the prestigious Nobel Peace Prize went to President Barack Obama.

Why, it was just days ago that many of them were gloating about how his “prestige has taken a beating” after Chicago failed in its bid to win the Olympic Games in 2016. “The Ego Has Landed,” claimed one right wing zealot. They were practically beside themselves with glee. All because Mr. Obama showed up in Copenhagen in person to lobby for Chicago’s Olympic bid. He’s the first sitting President to do this, they kept reminding us. He’s putting his prestige on the line, they cautioned.

Here’s what they failed to report: Almost every other country sent their own head of state to lobby the International Olympic Committee. What makes the US so exclusive that they should not send theirs? Brazil’s President spent three days schmoozing the Committee members in Denmark. That’s what you do when you want your country to win. In other words Mr. Obama, by showing up in person, was quite in line with generally accepted international protocol. In fact, his spending only a day with the committee members may have proved detrimental to the efforts of the Chicago team.

(That’s why internationally, the stereotypical view of the American nestles somewhere between “ignorant of world affairs” and “arrogant.” And we all know what happens when you pair arrogance with ignorance. But I digress...)

So I guess I can understand the “shock and awe” of the American press brought on by this recent announcement. They thought they had Mr. Obama all figured out. They thought he was “done” on the international stage.

In their agenda-setting function they frequently fail to see the forest for the trees. “Obama’s Nobel: The Last Thing He Needs,” writes Nancy Gibbs on time.com.

“I'm nonplussed - I admire his efforts toward Middle East peace, but the prize still seems very premature. What has he done?” writes Nicolas Kristof of the New York Times.

David Ignatius of the Washington Post: “The Nobel Peace Prize award to Barack Obama seems so goofy - even if you're a fan, you have to admit that he hasn't really done much yet as a peacemaker.” And finally from the Wall Street Journal’s Washington Wire blog, Susan Davis: "Exactly one week after President Barack Obama suffered an embarrassing defeat before an international body to secure his hometown of Chicago with the 2016 Games, he stuns the world and wins the Nobel Peace Prize.”

Oh, one more! CBS News’s Bob Schieffer: “It’s almost as if the committee today was giving Barack Obama a prize for not being George Bush.” And later he said: “I think this is not going to help the President. It’s not.”

Wait, wait!! How can I forget MSNBC’s Morning Joe crew?? (Including Mika Brzezinski!!) “No upside” “A disaster.” “The damage is done.”

What????!!!

Here’s what I’m nonplussed about: why it’s so difficult to understand how Mr. Obama was awarded this prize. Just read the press release, you press people!! It’s all explained there. If you still have trouble understanding it, try the version written in Norwegian!!! Or watch the Q&A session from the Nobel Committee. The Associate Press recently (hours ago) released a list of myths surrounding the Nobel Peace Prize. The last one:

Myth: The prize is awarded to recognize efforts for peace, human rights and democracy only after they have proven successful.

More often, the prize is awarded to encourage those who receive it to see the effort through, sometimes at critical moments.

The Nobel Committee Chairman Thorbjoern Jagland has stated with patient clarity that the award of the prestigious prize to Mr. Obama is in line with the behavior of the committee over the past decades. He gave examples. Willy Brandt, former Chancellor of West Germany in 1971. He went out on a limb to bring peaceful coexistence between East and West Germany and the Soviet Union. Did it work back then? No. Did Shimon Peres bring about Middle East Peace? No. Did Kissinger end the war in Vietnam (er, he escalated it) or bring about love and happiness between the North and South Vietnamese? No.

From the Nobel Committee press release:

“Obama has as President created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play. Dialogue and negotiations are preferred as instruments for resolving even the most difficult international conflicts. The vision of a world free from nuclear arms has powerfully stimulated disarmament and arms control negotiations. Thanks to Obama's initiative, the USA is now playing a more constructive role in meeting the great climatic challenges the world is confronting.”

Can anyone dispute that Mr. Obama has done the above? I think not. The US press loves to be both judge and jury, trying to set the agenda of public discourse. This one has them as confused as the people in the tower of Babel. Even the liberal media are running around like prating coxcombs, falling over themselves trying to  be “neutral” and “critical” in their response.

Prestige? Mr. Obama’s cup is overflowing with it, guys. If you’re looking for something concrete, find a wall and go bang your head against it. Maybe that’ll help clear things up a bit for you.

About the Author

Kehinde Chaytor is a Photojournalist and documentary filmmaker in Washington, DC, and fancies himself an avid media critic and observer.