Print 84 comment(s) - last by Belard.. on Nov 12 at 5:38 PM

Blocking Google being eyed as a way to get people to pay for News Corp content

Rupert Murdoch's move to online users to pay for content they read is infamous at this point. The publishing impresario has some of the most popular newspapers in the world under his News Corp umbrella.

Murdoch is also running one of the few successful publications online that charges for access -- The Wall Street Journal. The catch for Murdoch is that there is a well known workaround for accessing WSJ content online without having to pay or register with the publication -- Google. You can search the title of most any WSJ story that requires a paid account with Google and find the complete article for free.

Murdoch is now saying that he will remove stories all together from Google's search index as a way to encourage people to pay for content. Encourage here is a synonym for force. Murdoch told Sky News Australia that the papers in his empire including the Sun, Times, and WSJ would consider blocking Google entirely once that fully enacted plans for charging people to read stories.

Murdoch said, "I think we will (block Google), but that's when we start charging. We have it already with the Wall Street Journal. We have a wall, but it's not right to the ceiling. You can get, usually, the first paragraph from any story - but if you're not a paying subscriber to all you get is a paragraph and a subscription form."

Murdoch continued saying, "There's a doctrine called fair use, which we believe to be challenged in the courts and would bar it altogether... but we'll take that slowly."

Murdoch had previously promised that starting in 2010 charging for the use of his websites would be enacted. He is backtracking on that a bit and now says that he won’t promise that date will be met.

Murdoch said, "The people who simply just pick up everything and run with it – steal our stories, we say they steal our stories - they just take them. That's Google, that's Microsoft, that's, a whole lot of people ... they shouldn't have had it free all the time, and I think we've been asleep."

The ill will between Murdoch and Google is building on the back of significantly reduced traffic to MySpace. MySpace has a lucrative search deal in place with Google that may be one of the reasons the paid content work around has not been addressed before. With significantly increased competition from Facebook pushing MySpace into a second place spot in the social networking scene, MySpace has missed traffic goals set by Google. The shortfall in traffic equates to the potential for the loss of more than $100 million in income from the Google search deal.

As Murdoch ramps up his schemes to make money off the internet, Google CEO Eric Schmidt continues to scoff at Murdoch's plans. Schmidt has said in the past, "In general these models (paid online content) have not worked for general public consumption because there are enough free sources that the marginal value of paying is not justified based on the incremental value of quantity. So my guess is for niche and specialist markets ... it will be possible to do it but I think it is unlikely that you will be able to do it for all news."

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Encourage != Force
By mdogs444 on 11/9/2009 2:30:00 PM , Rating: -1
You are not required by law to have auto insurance unless you are driving. You could opt not to own a car, not get your drivers license, or ever drive - thus not requiring you to have auto insurance.

There is no such option with health insurance mandate in the liberal plan. Its basically fork over $5,000 for insurance, if you don't then you need to pay $2,500 to the IRS as a penalty. If you don't pay that, then you go to jail.

So if you don't want insurance, why would you pay $2,500 for absolutely nothing? Oh, thats right, its not for nothing. It's to keep lazy ass people who have no intention of getting a good job alive.

Yep, the left wing way - penalize success, reward failure. Rinse & reuse.

RE: Encourage != Force
By aj28 on 11/9/2009 8:13:50 PM , Rating: 3
Yep, the left wing way - penalize success, reward failure. Rinse & reuse.

Unless you plan to just roll over and die next time you become ill or are injured, your failure to cover your own health expenses is going to turn into a burden on others.

Or do you only see things within your bubble, the right wing way?

RE: Encourage != Force
By JohnnyCNote on 11/10/2009 9:52:06 AM , Rating: 4
It's to keep lazy ass people who have no intention of getting a good job alive.

Do you also hate disabled veterans who are unable to work? What about someone who worked for all his life, then comes down with kidney disease and needs dialysis? Is he "lazy ass" because he can no longer work and needs help paying the thousands of dollars (well over $100k annually in this case) for treatment he needs to keep alive long enough to get a transplant?

Or are you just full of anger and looking for anything to label "liberal" and thus feel justified in using it as an outlet for your hostilities? Have you ever been out in the real world and seen what's going on?

Do you realize it costs more now for you to pay for "lazy ass people" who can't afford health insurance than if it were provided for them before they got sick? Or do you want to ignore the facts because they get in the way of your obvious hatred for those less fortunate than you?

RE: Encourage != Force
By MrPoletski on 11/10/09, Rating: 0
RE: Encourage != Force
By MrPoletski on 11/10/2009 11:01:02 AM , Rating: 2

you could do us all a favour and opt to not live!

Then you wont need health insurance!

"It looks like the iPhone 4 might be their Vista, and I'm okay with that." -- Microsoft COO Kevin Turner

Most Popular ArticlesAre you ready for this ? HyperDrive Aircraft
September 24, 2016, 9:29 AM
Leaked – Samsung S8 is a Dream and a Dream 2
September 25, 2016, 8:00 AM
Yahoo Hacked - Change Your Passwords and Security Info ASAP!
September 23, 2016, 5:45 AM
A is for Apples
September 23, 2016, 5:32 AM
Walmart may get "Robot Shopping Carts?"
September 17, 2016, 6:01 AM

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki