Poor Rupert Murdoch rages against Google

Dáibhí

How refreshing that after decades of dominance poor Rupert Murdoch is now reduced to raging against Google's dominance.

This recession does have its positive points: first, the near collapse of Tony O'Reilly's control of the Irish media and now Murdoch is running scared.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2009/1110/news.html


'Murdoch Wants A Google Rebellion':

http://www.forbes.com/2009/04/03/rupert-murdoch-google-business-media-murdoch.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/nov/09/rupert-murdoch-google

Wibbs

Ahhh poor fella, so out of touch. The internet tends to see censorship as a fault and route around it. He can crow all he likes, but its like watching king canute trying to hold back the sea.

super_furry

Brilliant! Anything that causes Murdoch to complain can only be a force for good.

Spore

poor Rupert Murdoch - oh the ironing!

Kipperhell

Unfortunately even though I don't like him he has a point. If news papers don't have money they will close. Journalists need to be paid and eventually you just won't get reporting. The Wire had a good last season on it and while I think journalists are often very lazy if you reduce them I think you will get less good one too.

Murdock is of course trying to save what he worked for. It doesn't mean he hasn't got a point.

I have seen in my time that what is inaccurately reported in the media is inaccurately recorded in history. History is just a larger older Wikipedia with fewer people making entries.

Mark200

But isn't Murdoch's main problem with Google this:
http://news.google.com

I don't see how that is doing any harm? It's just like a search engine specialised for news.

Captain Havoc

To be honest, I get better and more accurate news coverage in AH than the Sun

Run_to_da_hills

Newspaper companies are already dropping off like flies, Last year the LA Times and SF Cronical filed Chapter 11 What we will end up with is the governments bailing out these and similar newspaper companies with one compromise, State Control. :eek:

Online format could be bad news further down the line as its content can be easily edited, censored or deleated on the spot by the authorities.

My name is URL

Fcuk him, the greedy prune headed prick

Macca07

As much as I dislike this man, he does have a point. Why buy a paper on the way to work when u can just sit down and check the news online. Papers are becoming a thing of the past now

Sleipnir

Kipperhell wrote: »

I have seen in my time that what is inaccurately reported in the media is inaccurately recorded in history. History is just a larger older Wikipedia with fewer people making entries.

You'd wonder then why so many journalists use Wikipedia as a source!

My name is URL

Macca07 wrote: »

As much as I dislike this man, he does have a point. Why buy a paper on the way to work when u can just sit down and check the news online. Papers are becoming a thing of the past now

That shouldn't matter, things are changing. It's cheaper, faster and better for the environment to read news online

you can't stop progress

"Adapt or perish, now as ever, is nature's inexorable imperative"

asdasd

The problem is that the advertising model does not work for newspapers, but it does for google.

Anyway I have a solution:

I think all they have to do is simply publish the website at 6 pm, so we get the commentary later and it get's linked to from forums like this i.e. :

Did anyone read Myers in the Indo today!!! as a topic here, and then later someone could link to it .

That would work as most people buy newspapers in the morning.

K-Ren

I'm Rupert Murdoch, and this is my skybox!

Oi Oi Oi Oi

asdasd

Admittedly I got this idea from the Sunday business post.

Blowfish

I think it's amusing that he thinks banning Google is going to hurt Google, when in reality it's going to hurt Murdoch a hell of a lot more.

People tend to search for specific topics rather than specific newspapers. If there's no link to your site for a topic, you'll miss out.

asdasd

Or will it?

Kipperhell

Sleipnir wrote: »

You'd wonder then why so many journalists use Wikipedia as a source!

Probably because fewer journalists have to cover more work. Though I think you missed the point I was making that he who writes the news writes the history.

Dudess

I don't know whether the newspaper will die for another while though - buying it every morning is a ritual people enjoy, especially on Sundays.

Kipperhell

Kipperhell wrote: »

Probably because fewer journalists have to cover more work. Though I think you missed the point I was making that he who writes the news writes the history.

May be correct to say that "he who writes the news, writes the first draft of the history" a lot of editing happens between the newspaper and the history book.

Anyway, there's an old saying about todays news being tomorrows chip wrappers. There are far too many websites dedicated to bringing up to the minute news to us now to worry about one news organisation trying to buck the trend.

He can block search engines, but people will just go elsewhere and he loses out!

Many people are prepared to wait a few hours for a decent report, rather than "Breaking News" type stuff.

A classic example being the recent death of Michael Jackson, "is he dead or not!" speculation that went on for several hours.

Dudess

Dudess wrote: »

I don't know whether the newspaper will die for another while though - buying it every morning is a ritual people enjoy, especially on Sundays.

There will always be a place for newspapers, just it will be in a different form in the future, possibly a weekly round up of the most popular web viewed stories analyzed by the papers reporters (slanted to the political leanings of the publishers and readers).

asdasd

Actually thats where you are wrong. I am somewhat sympathethic to Murdoch in this case only. Say he does what I suggest - online at 6pm. Say The Times gets an exclusive ( something like :MP's expenses - although that was the Telegraph - and everybody else is injuncted from publishing the original articles).

Will more people buy The Times on that day? From 6pm and for the rest of time the links on that story willl be to The Times anyway.

I think that would work. However going fully behind a paid firewall would not work.

asdasd

a weekly round up

is a magasine.

asdasd

asdasd wrote: »

is a magasine.

Published by the Guardian. :pac:

Slow Motion

Dudess wrote: »

I don't know whether the newspaper will die for another while though - buying it every morning is a ritual people enjoy, especially on Sundays.

I agree, video and later DVD were heralded as the death of the cinema when they came out, things change and not always for the worse!