Newspapers, Are They Really This Stupid?

Rupert Murdoch has suggested that News Corporation is likely to make its content unfindable to users on Google when it launches its paid content strategy .

Murdoch and other senior News Corp lieutenants have criticized search engines such as Google for taking a free ride on its content. Commentators have questioned why News Corp doesn’t simply make its content invisible to search engines.

LOL…. This was a hilarious quote from Murdoch, “Whats the point of having someone come occasionally who likes a headline they like in Google…?” Apparently he wants less eyes to his newspaper websites. He only wants people who pay, and he is willing to have less traffic to his sites. Murdoch claimed that readers who randomly reach a page via search have little value to advertisers. Asked by Sky News political editor David Speers why News hasn’t therefore made its sites invisible to Google, Murdoch replied: “I think we will.”

Andy Beal said: “I’ve decided that I really don’t need as many of you coming to Marketing Pilgrim each day. In fact, I’ve decided to start charging for the content that we publish. Oh, but I will still keep the advertisers’ money. They’ll just have to get used to the idea that we don’t have as many eyeballs viewing their ads. And, lastly, I’m kicking out Google. Yeah, I don’t need it bringing any additional readers to the site. They just consume extra bandwidth.”

Rupert’s contention that search engine traffic is expendable, Download Squad insists: “He’s pretty much just plain wrong … Search engines pretty much make the Web go round.”

Mashable: “It proves that Murdoch is sticking with the old model of how news and information is disseminated, and doesn’t plan to change it … The problem is, things don’t work the way they used to any more. ( I loved his title ending, “…And The World Yawns” yes, I am laughing out loud!!)

I love this, so if newspapers do go the paid content way, and they really do go after people legally, where will they be left? Really, just because you think your reporter has reported first, doesn’t mean they have. Does this mean that local search is going to be our new newspaper and phone book?

You have to listen to this whole interview, Murdoch is so out there, and obviously should have known more about his own newspapers and how they are already handling the paid content and the search engines. Here is the Sky News Interview with Rupert Murdoch.

Seth Godin:  “Rupert Murdoch has it backwards.  You don’t charge the search engines to send people to articles on your site, you pay them.  If you can’t make money from attention, you should do something else for a living. Charging money for attention gets you neither money nor attention.”

We have covered this subject here a few times, even made fun of the newspaper people in a way…I could go on and on about this and how ridiculous this is, but, let’s hear what you have to say!

Related articles…

• News Corporation plans to remove sites from Google (blogstorm.co.uk)
• Microsoft and News Corp in Discussions to Remove Newspaper Content from Google (mashable.com)
• Will Rupert Murdoch be The Savior of The News Industry? (thoughtpick.com)

Tagged as: andy beal, Download Squad, mashable, newspapers, newspapers charging for content, rupert murdoch, Sky News