I think the theory goes: Gama ray bursts would have violated the physics law E= mc^2 if the bursts weren't focused very very tightly in our direction because it would have required more mass changing into energy then all the mass in the universe. My misunderstanding comes in why anyone would think that focased beams of energy would require less energy in the big picture. If they are indeed focased beams ( I believe they are) this means that unless we are somehow at the center of the universe and we just got lucky and happened to be in the focas for all of these bursts, trillions of other bursts would have to be going off in every other direction too. So roughly equal amounts of mass would have to be converted to energy in both theories.
Am I missing something?

Gama ray bursts would have violated the physics law E= mc^2 if the bursts weren't focused very very tightly in our direction because it would have required more mass changing into energy then all the mass in the universe. I am at a loss to know where you heard this. It does not match my understanding. I should be interested in a source.

The following may be of interest to you:
http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/ApJ/journal/issues/ApJL/v487n1/5364/sc1.html?erFrom=-3529137670050311594Guest

I take two relevant points from it:

Point 1: it is clear from the discussion that the authors are considering an isotropic energy release, i.e. one that is equal in all directions. This negates the idea you have (mis)heard.
Point 2: it is noted that the variability of the signal indicates that the object emitting it is small. This certainly places a limit on the total energy that could be emitted.