And wrestling isn't sensationalist?

I recently wrote about the bizarre (and accurate) historical analogy in the patently faked story of the death of WWE's Vincent McMahon. However, given the double-murder-and-suicide of Chris Benoit, the story has been justifiably buried, as apparently (I go on reports here, as I'm in Brazil), Vince McMahon introduced Raw last night as a tribute to Benoit (before it was clear it was a double-murder-suicide). The burial of the storyline of McMahon's "death" is without question the tasteful thing to do here.

What's a little less tasteful is WWE's condemnation of the media for being "sensationalist" for reporting that steroids and roid rage were behind the incident (though at 6:20 PM Eastern time, the discovery of steroids at his house was breaking news, but we cannot fault WWE for writing a statement earlier in the day before this discovery was announced in the last 10 minutes as I write). No doubt, the media is sensationalist, and they are certainly trying to both try to explain why one of their most popular stars did this, and perhaps trying to deflect the (now inevitable) look towards the use of steroids in wrestling. However, it is more than a little ironic that the WWE, who just buried a storyline about its owner being "dead" and played it up (complete with a "federal investigator" reporting to the webpage), is now criticizing the news media for its sensationalism.

...UPDATE: Just to add to Lyrad's point on the exploitation of wrestlers' bodies with little concern for their health, see this scary list of wrestlers who have died before turning 50 since 1997, many from drugs or heart attacks (and the list doesn't even include recently-passed-away "Sensational" Sherri.)