| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Murdoch Says Newspaper Publishers Must Stand Up to Google, Bing | |
|
||
| Time: 08:05 EST/13:05 GMT | News Source: Business Week Online | Posted By: Andi Stabryla | ||
|
April 7 (Bloomberg) -- Rupert Murdoch, chairman and chief executive officer of News Corp., said newspaper publishers should prevent search engines like Google Inc. and Microsoft Corp.’s Bing from displaying full articles for free. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 151 Last | Next |
The time now is
1:16:56 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 2960 (72.205.26.164) at 4/7/2010 10:45:47 AM |
|
I think we should just let Rupert have his damned Newspaper. He surely doesn't understand the new-world Internet way of things.
I would think he of all people could figure out that little process known as Advertising. |
| #2 By 8556 (173.27.242.53) at 4/7/2010 10:47:04 AM |
| Pandora's box of web spiders was opened long ago. Good luck with your horse-and-buggy thinking Mr. Murdoch. Perhaps ads would bring in some money? On newspaper websites, that is. |
| #3 By 8556 (173.27.242.53) at 4/7/2010 10:48:35 AM |
| TL: Concerning mentioning online ads, you beat me by two minutes. I now shake my fist furiously at the display as I curse my slow typing skills. |
| #4 By 143 (96.28.66.92) at 4/7/2010 11:11:03 AM |
| If Rupert Murdoch is for anything I'm against it. |
| #5 By 230538 (74.219.160.9) at 4/7/2010 11:17:19 AM |
|
TL: That would make too much dang sense..
Don't you know business now days, is to continue raising prices of your products without offering new or better services, so your profits go up and the share holders are all happy. Instead of thinking up new ideas or ways to make more money. Then even when this doesn't work and you complain that search engines are "stealing" your articles and you're loosing profits, layoff the workers so that your profits aren't hit as bad because you're cutting back on your expenses. Heck, we had a heck of quarter and our profits went up, too bad we laid off 20,000 workers in the process. When capitalism becomes greed, then we have issue.. To bad the later seems prevalent now days.. |
| #6 By 113862 (74.204.153.254) at 4/7/2010 12:34:42 PM |
| I think Murdoch's gone senile..... |
| #7 By 27437 (128.122.204.124) at 4/7/2010 3:32:32 PM |
| That old bastard should just drop off the face of the earth. |
| #8 By 89249 (64.207.240.90) at 4/7/2010 5:09:27 PM |
|
Just to satisfy my curiousity... how many of you don't use an adblocker?
I've found so many who advocate free content through advertising block the advertising the expect to pay for their free content. As ad blockers become more and more widely used what then do people do? Murdoch is pretty nuts to be this way but seeing as newpapers everywhere are failing his model may catch on. I personally just wish there was actual reporting going on in any sector of the press. Everything has turned into biased blogging acting as if they are reporters. |
| #9 By 8556 (173.27.242.53) at 4/7/2010 6:17:39 PM |
| Newspapers in general have websites that follow the newspaper paradigm. Even Wall Street Journal, a paper profitable online and in print, follows the old formats. The iPad presents newspapers in similar format to the printed versions. Why not use a new design and force us to stomach at least one video ad for 30 to 60 seconds that then leads into the newspaper in the same non-text video format? Turn online newspapers into a user controlled (once the ad has played) video experience. Certainly the belly-aching Rupert has the cash to come up with an awesome system (Silverlight or Flash may not be ideal) that is not Fox news but an evolved newspaper with blended active and passive content, video ad supported. Any search engine links will start with the ad and Rupert can make more money than ever, if he can forget his 80 years of how things used to be done. |
| #10 By 20505 (216.102.144.11) at 4/8/2010 12:36:36 AM |
|
I'd like to voice a dissenting opinion. I think Murdock is right.
Google and other search engines are aggregating content paid for by a news organization and benefiting by selling ad space to advertisers. Google and the NY Times are direct competitors. They both seek to make money on an advertising model. For many years Google has gotten its content for free just by making it searchable. Google does not create content. They do not have to pay foreign bureau chiefs editors or anyone else for that matter. I believe that the content providers are dumb to let Google make money at their expense. The unfortunate result is that unless high quality news organizations are protected we will all be the poorer for it. Real journalism is dying. Remember - the "newspaper" is the fourth estate. Living in a democracy without high quality researched news content is unthinkable. And don't think about calling a "blog" high quality news content. 99% of the time these "articles" are pure opinion without research our editorial oversight i.e. crap. Google will be openly threatened only when a large number of news organizations ban together and demand a subscription fee for online access to possibly a dozen or so newspapers. If Google links to them they can be sued. Can't happen soon enough in my opinion. |
| #11 By 8556 (173.27.242.53) at 4/8/2010 12:51:41 AM |
| #10: Your opinion is respected. However, if visitors to Murdock's sites, from any search engine, were obliged to view an ad that Murdock puts in place without the "click here to skip this ad", why not do so and move into the future and at the same time stop the uphill battle? If his endgame is to get search engines to pay him for traffic sent to his sites then he has already lost. |
| #12 By 23275 (68.117.163.128) at 4/8/2010 8:38:39 AM |
|
I agree with oldog. The paid web is coming and it will happen much more quickly than most can imagine.
Content owners are not being rewarded for producing their products, but Google is. That will change. It has always been about content distribution and as what we regard as traditional ways of distributing it change and all things move over the Internet, most of it will be paid content. The notion of a "free" Internet in large part has always been that, a notion. Someone, perhaps not end users who didn't know any better, was still paying. Murdock is dead on and in the end, his view will become common. This post was edited by lketchum on Thursday, April 08, 2010 at 08:39. |
| #13 By 2960 (72.205.26.164) at 4/8/2010 12:28:10 PM |
| Here we go with the whole "MicroPayments" thing again. If that really does ever come to light, the Internet can kiss my ass :) |
| #14 By 23275 (172.16.10.197) at 4/8/2010 1:28:02 PM |
|
the way it will work is much as it does now with radio and television - regardless of transmission means - where one has access to a stack of channels and the advertising dollars flow from and to whom they should - vice a third party.
Similarly, paid premium content, as it is now, will be ad free. There will still be plenty of "free" ad supported Internet. It's just time that people who deliver content and carry the costs of production, get their due on the Internet - vice it all being a secondary "me too" distribution channel. Finally, the notion that everything must be free, is really getting annoying. Free to whom? I mean we all put up with one annoyance after another, because so many have no respect for property. The sync over HDMI from an HD satellite receiver to an HDTV is a PITA simply because some crook could otherwise obtain an HD copy and make it available over a torrent. There are no more excuses. Personally, I could not get the likes of Google out of my life fast enough and place them second only to the US Federal Govt among activities that I'd like to see constrained. |
| #15 By 1896 (68.153.171.248) at 4/8/2010 1:55:57 PM |
|
Actually I pay Comcast more than $100 per month in order to watch a couple of channels I like; I have a lot of other channels I do not care about it and I have to pay for, there are a huge amount of advertising spots and the same shows are repeated at least twice in a 24H period and usually between 2AM and 6Am there are only commercial and promotionals programs.
The overall TV offer in the US is the worst I have ever experienced. As for Murdoch he can keep "The Times"; since he bought it the newspaper has lost a lot of credibility. I watch BBC and read the Guardian; both are a much more pleasant experience. |
| #16 By 20505 (216.102.144.11) at 4/8/2010 4:13:29 PM |
|
Fritzly,
What if Comcast and other content providers aggregated services. By that I mean, what if you could watch any content from your computer or read articles from a wire service. I believe that has value. I'll bet if it was packaged properly, like say a Zune service model (ad and garbage free), it would be very attractive to many people. |
| #17 By 23275 (68.117.163.128) at 4/10/2010 11:01:45 AM |
|
#16, That is most likely exactly how it will go down and just as content is cross licensed, it will be on the new net and available across a wide range of services.
Most importantly, the browser as we know it will be dead. What is the point of it. Computers will bring back and expose small parts of "sites" - not all of it at once. |
| #18 By 899255 (216.152.251.6) at 3/29/2013 12:27:08 PM |
| In other language, if you're Concerned inSports,Black diddly, Craps, line roulette, Video fire hook, Slotsor you Feature been enumeration cards and Recognize the exact betting odds of a berth. http://www.onlinecasinoburger.co.uk/ - online casino <a href="http://www.onlinecasinotaste.co.uk/">casinos online</a> one-armed bandit Machines games and you are having desire to represent Topper latest games then you volition get Topper top Online casinos gambling with your friends. http://www.onlinecasinotaste.co.uk/ |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 151 Last | Next |
The time now is
1:16:56 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
