Comments on: Rupert Murdoch, the smartest man in newspapers? http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/2009/11/24/rupert-murdoch-the-smartest-man-in-newspapers/ Where media and technology meet Wed, 16 Nov 2016 08:48:25 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: James http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/2009/11/24/rupert-murdoch-the-smartest-man-in-newspapers/#comment-369839 Tue, 01 Dec 2009 03:05:39 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/?p=19938#comment-369839 I hope News Ltd do this. It will clean up a lot of the so called “news” provided via Google and hurt their hits/ad revenue in the process. It’s naive to think his competitors won’t take advantage of this. Doesn’t Murdoch realise that he has devalued his own product over the years and now most of his tabloid news comes from the people and the internet – so he is the one getting content “free”. People don’t care where they get general celebrity news these days. If they want good analysis of stories they’ll go direct to specialised sites and more often than not these days they are independant web sites set up by journalists sick of the big media players. The paradigm has changed and Murdoch doesn’t still doesn’t get it. Let him cut of his own nose…

]]>
By: Ghost Dansing http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/2009/11/24/rupert-murdoch-the-smartest-man-in-newspapers/#comment-369780 Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:17:52 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/?p=19938#comment-369780 Actually, mentioning Rupert Murdoch in the same paragraphy as “news” and “professional” is naivete of breathtaking proportions. There is “Yellow Journalism” and then there is Rupert Murdoch and all he owns, something not even of the caliber of infotainment, but something more like infoganda. That “professional content” should not be included on any search engine actually searching for news items.

]]>
By: W Smith http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/2009/11/24/rupert-murdoch-the-smartest-man-in-newspapers/#comment-369774 Mon, 30 Nov 2009 06:40:18 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/?p=19938#comment-369774 I really hope Rupert does this so I won’t have to see any of his “news” on Google ever again. It will only improve Google’s signal-to-noise ratio. Please do it Rupert, we won’t miss you at all.

]]>
By: mark http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/2009/11/24/rupert-murdoch-the-smartest-man-in-newspapers/#comment-369681 Thu, 26 Nov 2009 12:55:43 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/?p=19938#comment-369681 sky/murdoch/fox etc isn’t the only news producer around, and outside of the US it’s not the best regarded content anyway… so google will still show bbc, cnn et al – people will stick with that and they will benefit from Google giving them better ‘share of voice’. work away murdoch….

]]>
By: Rob http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/2009/11/24/rupert-murdoch-the-smartest-man-in-newspapers/#comment-369673 Thu, 26 Nov 2009 04:22:43 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/?p=19938#comment-369673 Murdoch has recognized several problems with a Google partnership. First, there is the Google “split”, in which the lion’s share of online advertising revenue goes to Google, not the content provider. Second, the only party which can audit Google is Google; that is, if Google tells a content provider that an advert has 10 hits, the content provider must believe (and cannot verify) that the advert had only 10 hits… even if Google charged the advertiser for 100 hits. Third, Google caches content; that is, Google can (and does) supply content from a single “hit” of the provider’s system. Fourth, neither a Google partner nor any credible editor cannot specify positioning in Google search results, often making “good” content drift beneath salacious content.As evidenced during the proceedings of the case of Authors Guild v. Google, Google intends to become the sole publisher of Internet-accessible content. From both a financial and a patriotic standpoint, it seems wise to try to kill the tyrant before it grows too powerful to be subdued.

]]>
By: Rod http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/2009/11/24/rupert-murdoch-the-smartest-man-in-newspapers/#comment-369665 Wed, 25 Nov 2009 17:03:39 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/?p=19938#comment-369665 Generally speaking, Mr Murdoch has tended to make money by using new technologies early. But not always. For instance, in 1995 or thereabouts he stopped work on interactive/internet developments at HarperCollins, and actually he came very late to the Internet. His huge contempt for working journalists makes him an unlikely defendant of their rights in this case, too. I doubt very much that content from the News Corp newspapers would even be missed by users of Google News.

]]>
By: Justin D http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/2009/11/24/rupert-murdoch-the-smartest-man-in-newspapers/#comment-369656 Wed, 25 Nov 2009 04:22:14 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/?p=19938#comment-369656 Let him try I say. Coming from the man who owns Fox news I find it laughable that anyone would want to pay for their news. And with the constant rise of alternate news sources like was seen during the elections in Iran with Twitter and video from phones, pda’s etc streaming directly to the net. And in many cases it’s the people at the scene of the news gathering the footage not the ‘journos’ who arrive after the fact. Then it just gets regurgitated to us via a ‘news provider’ so really what would we be paying them for?

]]>
By: Ken http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/2009/11/24/rupert-murdoch-the-smartest-man-in-newspapers/#comment-369642 Tue, 24 Nov 2009 22:17:13 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/?p=19938#comment-369642 Gapper wonders in print “Why, the thinking goes, should Google make a bunch of money off the news that we produce and our newsrooms go starving and our ad sales tank?”Fair question, but I can’t help but wonder if Mr. Murdoch shares that pain.

]]>
By: Pat http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/2009/11/24/rupert-murdoch-the-smartest-man-in-newspapers/#comment-369637 Tue, 24 Nov 2009 19:24:30 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/?p=19938#comment-369637 The majority of actual print newspapers comes from the classifieds and ad revenue. your subscription pays for paper, ink, delivery, etc. Online papers dont need to pay printers, delivery, or any of the real world infrastructure. Because of this simple fact the ad revenue SHOULD be enough. not to mention the ability to get a scoop (which they lost when tv came out) and get hits from that. The internet should’ve evened the playing field for papers who embraced the opportunity, unfortunately many only saw it as a place to paste their articles. Not going to feel bad for them. And good journalists have learned to hybrid-work for Frontline, freelance and blog (while getting paid for ads). Let the slow die off and the smart will find a way

]]>
By: C.K. Patterson http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/2009/11/24/rupert-murdoch-the-smartest-man-in-newspapers/#comment-369635 Tue, 24 Nov 2009 18:44:48 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/mediafile/?p=19938#comment-369635 Murdock understands something Google, with all its brilliance, seems not to know: Reporters and editors enjoy being paid for their work.A retired newspaper person, I set Google-news as my home page and attend it daily following my morning newspaper read.What has long been clear to me through that experience is that without newspaper content, Google-news will be a pathetic mash-up of infotainment. Many of us will be happy to pay a bit to get that content. Might even return to the WSJ, knowing it serves Murdock’s bottom line more than the reader.ckpat

]]>