Rupert Murdoch to take news off Google
By
SiliconIndia,Tuesday, 10 November 2009, 01:47 Hrs
Bangalore: Rupert Murdoch, the media czar who heads prime news sources like The Wall Street Journal, The New York Post, 20th Century Fox and Fox News, has threatened Google that he will soon pull the plug to make his sites disappear from Google listing.
In an interview with Sky News Australia, Murdoch accused Google, Microsoft, and others of "stealing" his company's content. When asked why he doesn't pull his web sites from Google's search results he replied, "I think we will. But that's when we start charging."

So far the company has been earning money through advertising content, but now Murdoch and other News Corporation executives have said that they intend to charge readers and viewers. When asked why he would buck the trend of offering free content, Murdoch said, "(The public) shouldn't have had it free. I think we've been asleep. What's the point of having someone come occasionally who likes a headline they see in Google? The fact is there isn't enough advertising in the world to go around to make all the web sites profitable. We'd rather have fewer people coming to our web sites but paying," reported CNET.
Google has said that it feels obligated to help media companies because it needs their content. Google responded to Murdoch's comments in a report by The Telegraph. "Publishers put their content on the web because they want it to be found," Google said in a statement. "Very few choose not to include their material in Google News and web search. But if they tell us not to include it, we don't."
Google says that it only takes two lines of computer code added to a file called "robots.txt," which every website uses to tell search engines where, or not, to wander. So if it is so easy to do so then why isn't Murdoch pulling the plug. The decision to do so can be a big gamble and can backfire badly for Murdoch. Once Murdoch takes his sites off Google, internet advertising based revenue will almost disappear.
On the other hand, paying to read news article might bring in more revenue than advertising. It will also bring an end to the content being copied by other news websites. If a news website is the first with a scoop, it will soon be buried under the avalanche of copies and rewrites that sucks any value out of being ahead of the crowd.
In that regard, Murdoch's desire to get away from the roundabout of Google News is sensible as he has an old-fashioned vision of the value of journalism.
Google, meanwhile, will remain unmoved. "Google delivers more than a billion consumer visits to newspaper websites each month. These visits offer the publishers a business opportunity, the chance to hook a reader with compelling content, to make money with advertisements or to offer online subscriptions," wrote Google Senior Business Product Manager Josh Cohen in a blog post. "The truth is that news publishers, like all other content owners, are in complete control when it comes not only to what content they make available on the web, but also who can access it and at what price."
The readers will be most affected by this, who by now are used to free content and e-paper culture. Paying to read online news might not appeal to majority of readers and Murdoch will have to venture into unchartered territory to rope in revenue.
In an interview with Sky News Australia, Murdoch accused Google, Microsoft, and others of "stealing" his company's content. When asked why he doesn't pull his web sites from Google's search results he replied, "I think we will. But that's when we start charging."
So far the company has been earning money through advertising content, but now Murdoch and other News Corporation executives have said that they intend to charge readers and viewers. When asked why he would buck the trend of offering free content, Murdoch said, "(The public) shouldn't have had it free. I think we've been asleep. What's the point of having someone come occasionally who likes a headline they see in Google? The fact is there isn't enough advertising in the world to go around to make all the web sites profitable. We'd rather have fewer people coming to our web sites but paying," reported CNET.
Google has said that it feels obligated to help media companies because it needs their content. Google responded to Murdoch's comments in a report by The Telegraph. "Publishers put their content on the web because they want it to be found," Google said in a statement. "Very few choose not to include their material in Google News and web search. But if they tell us not to include it, we don't."
Google says that it only takes two lines of computer code added to a file called "robots.txt," which every website uses to tell search engines where, or not, to wander. So if it is so easy to do so then why isn't Murdoch pulling the plug. The decision to do so can be a big gamble and can backfire badly for Murdoch. Once Murdoch takes his sites off Google, internet advertising based revenue will almost disappear.
On the other hand, paying to read news article might bring in more revenue than advertising. It will also bring an end to the content being copied by other news websites. If a news website is the first with a scoop, it will soon be buried under the avalanche of copies and rewrites that sucks any value out of being ahead of the crowd.
In that regard, Murdoch's desire to get away from the roundabout of Google News is sensible as he has an old-fashioned vision of the value of journalism.
Google, meanwhile, will remain unmoved. "Google delivers more than a billion consumer visits to newspaper websites each month. These visits offer the publishers a business opportunity, the chance to hook a reader with compelling content, to make money with advertisements or to offer online subscriptions," wrote Google Senior Business Product Manager Josh Cohen in a blog post. "The truth is that news publishers, like all other content owners, are in complete control when it comes not only to what content they make available on the web, but also who can access it and at what price."
The readers will be most affected by this, who by now are used to free content and e-paper culture. Paying to read online news might not appeal to majority of readers and Murdoch will have to venture into unchartered territory to rope in revenue.
Don't Miss
Write your comment now
|
Submit your news/press release
Let our editorial department know about any news about your company, your
organization, or yourself, or any press release that you have. If we find it suitable for our audience, we will contact you and make a news. Please
also share any links for the news.
Reader's comments (17)
1: Btw if Murdoch can charge for the news at his
sites, then perhaps the next in line would be
charges put forth by those who create the
news :D..... This might have worked sometime
back... but not now... there's no definite
revenue the readers are going to make by
reading the news, atleast the majority of
them.... so there's no point paying for it :)
Posted by: Antony - 23 May, 2010
2: Ha ha sounds so funny. Paying to read news on
the net when we can actually see it on TV
besides getting the news from innumerable
other news sites. The idea of charging
viewers for reading news from the sites
itself seems foolish, specially in the days
of RSS feeds and the blogs. Ok Mr Murdoch, I
wish u good luck in your effort of going
bankrupt. And thank you for making me laugh.
Its a long time I had such a hearty laugh.
Ha ha ha ha ha............
Posted by: Binoy - 13 Nov, 2009
3: If Google is giving so many leads and Murdoch
is receiving them and if still he is not
happy, then it means a few things about those
sites, their advertisers, google and the
clickers.
Murdoch's sites are not generating revenue by the clickers.
Murdoch's advertisers are not happy with him.
Murdoch's sites are not so attractive to establish long time relationships.
Clicks dont pay.
Murdoch's sites are not generating revenue by the clickers.
Murdoch's advertisers are not happy with him.
Murdoch's sites are not so attractive to establish long time relationships.
Clicks dont pay.
Posted by: Edcare - 11 Nov, 2009
4: Henry Ford once said `i am happy to offer a
car of any colour as long as its black!'
Murdoch, another Ford in the making.
A mistake by so-called business. Here comes a 21st century czar with a 19th century mindset!
Is it age? OR
Are his companies sinking without no other revenues? OR
Is he trying to kill his company? OR
An sheer audacity that he has a thriving business?
The question is why should news be charged? As if we are dying to read news from his websites and channels?
Ghosh, I can't remember when me, my family members, relatives and friends last saw a Star TV channel! We are glued to the regional channels for all info.
And then there are news sites like indiatimes, yahoo, cnn ibn, name it.... even BBC and other world news sites for information. Here is a media czar trying to kill his company! There are hundreds of sites that give news. As long as the acknowledgements and source of news is clearly mentioned, he should have no problem. Let him get his revenues from advertisements and sponsorships, not by selling news! Good ol' newspaper boy.
Remove all bookmarks of their sites, that's the best solution.
A mistake by so-called business. Here comes a 21st century czar with a 19th century mindset!
Is it age? OR
Are his companies sinking without no other revenues? OR
Is he trying to kill his company? OR
An sheer audacity that he has a thriving business?
The question is why should news be charged? As if we are dying to read news from his websites and channels?
Ghosh, I can't remember when me, my family members, relatives and friends last saw a Star TV channel! We are glued to the regional channels for all info.
And then there are news sites like indiatimes, yahoo, cnn ibn, name it.... even BBC and other world news sites for information. Here is a media czar trying to kill his company! There are hundreds of sites that give news. As long as the acknowledgements and source of news is clearly mentioned, he should have no problem. Let him get his revenues from advertisements and sponsorships, not by selling news! Good ol' newspaper boy.
Remove all bookmarks of their sites, that's the best solution.
Posted by: Smanojs - 11 Nov, 2009
5: Howsoever Murdoch vs Google is going to be, I
would personally ask Murdoch just to stay
away from the rest of the world. Later, when
he feels like to return, probably then the
world would have become different and may be
that he is charged to list his name on the
Google.
I do not feel that the netizens will ever loose something. It may happen that the name of those news channels will simply loose currency.
If Murdoch feels that he is having unsolicited guests and pennyless visitors, probably in times to come, the so called guests and visitors may quite sooner call the shots.
Happy Murdoch, go lucky.
I am personally interested to observe your experiment at your own cost.
Give me that pie.
I do not feel that the netizens will ever loose something. It may happen that the name of those news channels will simply loose currency.
If Murdoch feels that he is having unsolicited guests and pennyless visitors, probably in times to come, the so called guests and visitors may quite sooner call the shots.
Happy Murdoch, go lucky.
I am personally interested to observe your experiment at your own cost.
Give me that pie.
Posted by: Edcare - 11 Nov, 2009
6: information should be free
Posted by: hemant - 11 Nov, 2009
7: It is not going to affect Google in anyway.
Number of views for Rupert Murdoch's news
sites may go less.
Posted by: Prathap - 10 Nov, 2009
8: Dear Mr. Rupert Murdoch,
Please don't be so arrogant on Google news .
Can you swear that you (or your reporters and editors)have not
used Google or other news sources to bring out your news copy? .
You cannot see your own back ? right
Please don't be so arrogant on Google news .
Can you swear that you (or your reporters and editors)have not
used Google or other news sources to bring out your news copy? .
You cannot see your own back ? right
Posted by: Hans - 10 Nov, 2009
9: In a way I do agree with Rupert Murdoch by
threatening to pull off the Google platform.
He won't have made a comment with any prior
research and analysis done.
Posted by: Selvan Shiv Kumar - 10 Nov, 2009
10: He is just pulling himself into a nice hole.
I think, he does'nt quite understand the web
, nobody wants to pay for anything here.
Google and microsoft are going to eat his lunch.
Google and microsoft are going to eat his lunch.
Posted by: vengu - 10 Nov, 2009
11: All news is bad news anyway ....never read it
myself. Besides it is so manipulated and
misleading. who cares?
Posted by: Anthia - 10 Nov, 2009
12:Perfect right..i do agree with you..
Abhishek replied to: Anthia
post - 10 Nov, 2009
post - 10 Nov, 2009
13: we will miss it
Posted by: vichoo nair shree - 10 Nov, 2009
14: Rupert Murdoch has played hard ball all his
life ... so this move is no surprise.
However, he will have a tough time getting
control of the fundamental paradigm shift
that is gaining momentum in his field. He has
profited mightily from more and more revenue
from shallower and shallower news ... and now
we are moving to deeper news that cannot be
easily controlled for simplistic media and
political messages. Go Google!
Posted by: Peter Burgess - 10 Nov, 2009
15:When the titans such as he fall, it will be
said of them..
The minstrels and the wandering bards
Paid homage to a house of cards
Dr. Karan
The minstrels and the wandering bards
Paid homage to a house of cards
Dr. Karan
Dr. Karan Aggarwala replied to: Peter Burgess
post - 10 Nov, 2009
post - 10 Nov, 2009
16: In the war between Murdoch and Google, reader
will be effected the most. Imagine having to
pay for news. If one company starts doing
that then everyone will follow.
Posted by: Zoeb - 10 Nov, 2009
17:It doesnt matter.. its not the reader but the
news company which will be at a loss there
are billions of sites that will provide
necessary input for the news... u dont worry
we would be far better off if people like
Murdoch pull their plugs.. other news
websites will draw more ad revenue.. in
todays world of free journalism no one should
even think of charging for just posting
news...
Mittal replied to: Zoeb
post - 10 Nov, 2009
post - 10 Nov, 2009
Disclaimer
Messages posted on this Web site under the `Comments' area are solely the opinions of those who have posted them and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Infoconnect Web Technologies India Pvt Ltd or its site www.siliconindia.com. Gossip, mud slinging and malicious attacks on individuals and organizations are strictly prohibited. Infoconnect Web Technologies India Pvt Ltd can not be held responsible for errors or omissions in content, nor for the authenticity of the user/company name or email addresses associated with posted messages. Infoconnect Web Technologies India Pvt Ltd reserves the right to edit or remove messages containing inappropriate language or any other material that could be construed as libelous, potentially libelous,
or otherwise offensive or inappropriate.Infoconnect Web Technologies India Pvt Ltd do not endorse the products and services or any other offerings mentioned in these messages.
- Software Testing is Dead!!!
- Indian Army Preparing for Limited Conflict with China
- Indian Brains Behind 50 Percent of U.S. Patents
- Why is Priyanka Gandhi Liked More than Rahul Gandhi?
- Selective Abortion on the Rise among Indians in North America
- India's Most Wanted: Pak's Political Hero
- 5 Best Android Smartphones Under Rs.10,000
Beautiful and dress selection, please go to Dresses
| Plan on visiting the Lotus Temple? Get Great Deals on Delhi Hotels ! |
Buy India Wholesale Products on DHgate.com
SPOTLIGHT
Technology
Its time to rejoice for techies this year with technology booming like no other sector.
..