Rupert Murdoch considers Google block

Cantankerous old man

Someone tell him to get back in his box. He still sells millions of papers every day and advertising on his websites should cover the cost of running them. They are not video heavy or social networking so bandwidth won't be too extreme.

By ralphuk100 on 9 Nov 2009

Counter-prodcutive

If he blocks Google from searching his site he'll automatically elminate 99% of the people who visit it. Most users just Google rather than typing in the URL these days. He could make a lot more money if he worked with Google rather than against them. Anyway, if he's going to start charging people will just use other free News sites (such as BBC, Guardian or somewhat ironically, Google News!).

By anthona on 9 Nov 2009

It'll be interesting to see what happens when he finally acts rather than considers or threatens.

I don't know how many journalist work for free, or for that matter free sites.

I just read everything for free - I suppose I should really pay - nah no way! Journalists should work for free!!

By nicomo on 9 Nov 2009

Journalists don't work for free

The work for a percentage of the advertising revenue raised by their website or publication.
Since I don't read anything I wipe my arse with, I would suggest advertisers avoid Mr. Murdoch's publications...

By cheysuli on 9 Nov 2009

"Murdoch, whose New Corp empire COMPROMISES the Sun, the Times, Sky and the Wall Street Journal among others"

I'd suggest that you might of meant something else but the rest of the article would seem to support it...

By nerazzurri on 10 Nov 2009

If Murdoch blocks Google then Google should ignore Murdoch. See who breaks first.

By Shuflie on 10 Nov 2009

@ nerazzurri

Whoops. Thanks for the spot. Fixed.

By StuartTurton on 10 Nov 2009

Yet another example of my principle Bugbear

19th century attitudes towards 21st Century technology.

Either the pay-for-content model has to work on a different basis (like making microscopic charges of less than a penny an article) or it has to be entirely dropped and replaced with advertising revenue (as has already happened with 99% of the internet)

By SpiroExDeus on 10 Nov 2009

World considers Murdoch Ban ?

Well Murdoch may control a huge slice of news media but not all of it, surely the answer is that we ALL including Google Ban his sites, his newspapers and his TV stations. If ever a man deserved a kick up the...

By dave_guy on 12 Nov 2009

Yes Block Murdoch From Earth

Murdoch is a walking talking virus, please wipe him off the internet.

By exigsis on 12 Nov 2009

Its all going free

Surprising Murdoch, who forced the change to efficient computerised printing(to make him more profit) does not recognise that the current Newspaper staff journalism model is doomed. In a few years there will be electronic only, proabally free, papers, created and continuously modified, by automated software from a few (state) news sources and a band of freelance journalists scraping a living at the edge. Papers will be downloaded and hardly ever printed, except by the end user. Murdoch's empire will rust away.

By fortysix on 12 Nov 2009

Quality Counts

Dear Mr Murdoch appears to not to understand the market. If (big if) he were to publish articles that were of sufficient quality and without his editorial bias he might find enough loyal visitors who would comeback to his web sites and enough advertisers who would pay for access to such an audience.

Whilst quality and bias dominate then of course he cannot attract the visitors, nor the advertising revenues.

Microsoft tried paid content with MSN in 1995 and had to abandon it as everyone ignored the paid content and went for the free.

By richardirwin on 12 Nov 2009

The man is a fool

Advertisers care only about getting their ads seen, they don't care if those viewing them are loyal readers. If he follows through on his threat, the number of hits on his sites will plummet - and so will his ad revenue.

I think it would be great if Murdoch's empire were to crumble, but he'll probably wise up before that happens - a pleasant prospect to dream about, but I doubt it will occur.

By greenknight32 on 12 Nov 2009

Go, Murdoch, GO!!!

I think we should all encourage him to go ahead with this, and we should tell him that we're all standing behind him (as far behind him as possible) and we fully support his google block.

If he wants his publications to become invisible on the Internet, that's precisely what should happen.

In fact, Google should save him the trouble and pre-emptively block his sites and leave them blocked while Murdoch still owns them.

By alizard on 12 Nov 2009

Quality Counts

Dear Mr Murdoch appears to not to understand the market. If (big if) he were to publish articles that were of sufficient quality and without his editorial bias he might find enough loyal visitors who would comeback to his web sites and enough advertisers who would pay for access to such an audience.

Whilst quality and bias dominate then of course he cannot attract the visitors, nor the advertising revenues.

Microsoft tried paid content with MSN in 1995 and had to abandon it as everyone ignored the paid content and went for the free.

By richardirwin on 12 Nov 2009

mikesey

I have never liked Murdoch, who seems to have a God complex. I hope he does remove all his wretched sites from internet search engines. We do not need him or his gutter-press polluting our computers, and there are plenty of other websites to look at for news; most of them much better than his.

By mikesey on 12 Nov 2009

completely right

Google earns a fotune from other peoples copyrights and content. The quicker they get back in their box the better.

By ptp_producer on 12 Nov 2009

Not if Google strike first

If he's getting narky at Google, let them make the first move and zero-rank all News Corp pages, like they did to BMW when they were arrogant enough to try fiddling the page ranking system. When I Google for Sun, I want high-grade servers not low-grade newspapers.

By mspritch on 12 Nov 2009

I 'd rather read a paper than the Sun

Why would anyone, wanting news, read any of mr Murdoch's publications?
Advertising revenue should be sufficient to cover his costs plus a healthy profit, but what he REALLY wants is control.He is by instinct opposed to the freedoms enjoyed by internet users.
Just ignore him, Google and he and his greedy associates will go away.
The future will be Google shaped, not Murdoch shaped - thank God!

By jayardine1 on 12 Nov 2009

Murdoch's myopia

Great! Take his biased press viewpoints away from the internet and let other more truthful accounts be parasitised. I would cancel my Sky subscription if the local tv reception was better. Power mad Oz gnome! I might vote for Gordon Brown just to spite Murdoch.

By evonadarling on 12 Nov 2009

Greedy Old Git

It's about time Rupert Murdock took a dip in the ocean and tried to join the "failed swimmer", Robert Maxwell.

It's strange that the dead greedy old git shares his initials with the currently alive greedy old git. Do you know any one else with the initials of RM and are they just as greedy too?

By shrek59 on 12 Nov 2009

humsh2

The last time owners of British newspapers lost the plot they were described by the Prime Minister as seeking, "power without responsibility, the prerogative of the harlot down the ages."

By Humsh2 on 12 Nov 2009

Spoil Sport

Obviously doesn't want anyone to know about his newspapers.

By birdmaniw on 12 Nov 2009

thedrumdoctor

I believe it was Dennis Potter's dying wish to literally, kill Murdoch. I couldn't do such a deed, but I can understand Potter's frustration with this vile little man.

By thedrumdoctor on 14 Nov 2009