Is Rupert Murdoch on to something?
 

Recently, Murdoch suggested he'd pull News Corp newspapers/media out of Google ...


Here's the stock market reception:

http://i37.tinypic.com/1rs1gn.jpg

Americans ARE willing to pay for News.... http://www.bcg.com/media/PressReleas...d=tcm:12-35297

The bad news is that it averages $3 PER MONTH.

lolz...


Fail?

i got the impression he wants the search engines to pay, not individual readers.

I know, but the second post in this thread provides background on how viable that approach would be to News Corps potential search engine customers...

i see. so do you think the search engines would be the ones charging customers for news then?

I hope he does, it will be a fun experiment to watch.

I would bet it hurts his company way more then google.

The word is: he is either a genius and has something up his sleeves, or he is totally off his rocker.

we'll see , what future brings up

I posted the full interview with him last week if anyone wants to watch it.....

fucking-around-and-business-discussion/937781-exclusive-biz-interview-rupert-murdoch-tubes-piracy-free-content-video.html

It's really a brilliant idea if he can influence a few other media companies to follow suit. Microsoft needs an edge to gain market share from Google. By paying News Corp for exclusive search access to their content, Microsoft is now giving users a legitimate reason to switch search engines. Google in turn realizes this and could set off a bidding war for News Corp access (as well as other media companies content) and give these news/entertainment sites much needed additional revenue.

There ya go!:thumbsup

are people going to switch to bing just to have news corp results in their search? no.

if they want news corp sites that bad they will just bookmark then and continue to use google.

google already pays several agencies for content. i doubt google is in the backseat on any bidding war.

fyi, the nytimes has reported subscriber revenue has surpassed ad revenue for their digital property.

You might not but let's say you're a student writing a research paper and you need to dig up some info. Microsoft ads have made you aware that Bing has search results for some of the biggest news outlets in the world along with their entire backlog of content and you can only get those results from Bing, not Google.

Now let's say other media companies follow suit and all of a sudden if you're writing an article, need info etc you're going to search Bing before you search Google.

epic fail in 3... 2...

Rupert Murdoch aint totally dumb. i am sure he made a mistake or two with Myspace but overall he has a pretty good grasp of media.

exactly. it's a matter of posturing. news corp can create the illusion that THEY are blocking goog, or will block them. they are not in bed with any one engine and wouldn't want anyone thinking that anyways.

murdoch is trying to create a grouop of news agencies who are working together to re-establish content as king.

otherwise, he could simply add a robot file to stop goog indexing his site.

myspace has made him his money back. twice over.

FOX is just a fad.


.

Depends on how many will pay for it.

He has been making comments like this on a regular basis for nearly year. He OBVIOUSLY has a long term plan in mind and his hint dropping every few weeks is just part of that plan.

The guy knows what he is doing and the plan a already in motion, whatever it is.

BTW, Murdock made a ton of money with Myspace. The people that ran it let it fall behind, but his initial investment paid off big time. It still makes more profit than Facebook.

That's what the market is betting. The point of this thread is to make people aware that there's a possible shift happening here and to spot the opportunity once it gets full momentum.

I just saw an interview on CNN with the guy who wrote the Biography on Google with Larry and Brin...He said...one day he was talking to Sergei and he said that he "should give away his book for free on the internet" The Author had to explain to him how would he be able to get paid if he did that? who would pay the advance? who would pay him for 2 years to write the book while he was off from the the New York Times?

Basically the Author said " They (Google) does not understand copyright yet"
Google would shit if somebody stole their algorithms or used their tech and relabelled it.

They will and so will the courts one day.

I hope he drives the company into the ground and buries himself with it.

this is about google's philosophy that all information should be free and others idea to pay for it


google will win in the end

Grumpy old man that every now and then has to throw his toys out of the pram.

Yes let's make the internet like cable where every site costs a subscription. :Oh crap Murdoch is a pompous ass and an idiot.

I'm not sure how 48% accounts for a MAJORITY?

Among regular Internet users in the United States, 48 percent said in the survey, conducted in October, that they would pay to read news online, including on mobile devices.

I'm also not sure how even that can be accuarate considering how many people don't even want to pay 99 cents for a song so they steal it.

Even if News Corp and all the other news providers put up pay walls there will always be the BBC. Until the UK Government decides otherwise the BBC news site will be free and without any ads whatsoever, that's going to be hard to compete with no matter what Murdoch does!

Many of the replies in this thread are pure comedy.

Carry on.

I'm not sure exactly what you're referencing in my post. In this scenario Murdoch is asking the search engines to pay for the rights to index his content, not the actual surfer.

And on top of that, even if News Corp does go to a limited pay subscription model, what is so wrong with a company asking the public to actually pay for access to their content?

Also in reference to your last line. Yeah, what an idiot. That whole News Corp empire thing. Obviously pure luck. What a bafoon. :helpme