Closed vs. Open online news

Posted by dmcnulty | Posted in , , , , | Posted on 12:38 PM

This man might destroy all that is sacred to tech junkies and their wives: Open access to news.

Rupert Murdoch is a media mogul. He controls The Sun, The Times, The New York Post, The Wall Street Journal, Fox, and Hulu--- just to name a few. He recently publicly denounced Google for making his newspapers' headlines and stories a part of Google search engine results. He has been at odds with Google for quite some time, but it actually seems like he is making serious threats this time. In another article, he is quote as saying:

"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. (The public) shouldn't have had it free. I think we've been asleep."

So basically Murdoch is saying he is going to remove his news conglomerate from Google's search engines. Everyone who will want online access to these sites will have to pay a fee. Through my researching, I never actually heard if it would be a monthly subscription fee or a pay as you click method. Regardless, it has created a huge stir in the technology community. Google is fighting back by saying the public should have free access to news and information in general. Google is a very financially successful company and believes there is still a way news companies can make money even if they are not charging fees to readers.


The Biz Stone, co-founder of Twitter, agrees with Google's approach of free access. In another article, Stone says:


"They [Murdoch] should be looking at this as an opportunity to try something radically different and find out a way to make a ton of money from being radically open rather than some money from being ridiculously closed."


***


I can't imagine a life without Google searching for news articles. And I don't want to pay for that service! It is a messy gray area, and I think it is going to get pretty ugly between these two mega entities. It is definitely a battle of old school versus new school. I hope Google wins because Twitter's co-founder is correct: free access does not mean no revenue.


I mean, don't they save news reels and databases at libraries? I don't have to pay to access those, but when they are posted online, that's when it is a problem. Murdoch is just being a selfish old man that refuses to accept the way information technology is evolving. He is a financial tycoon; I am pretty sure he could still figure out a way to make millions by letting his newspapers, television stations, and news websites give Google free reign on searching.


If not...it is going to be much more costly and difficult to find research articles for those upcoming term papers. Thumbs down. Good luck, Google.

Comments (0)

Post a Comment