About us Login Get email updates
County Fair
Print

Rupert Murdoch, tech-genius, preparing for war with Google?

November 09, 2009 2:53 pm ET by Karl Frisch

He failed miserably with MySpace.

He launched the right-wing TheFoxNation.com claiming it was "time to say 'no' to biased media and 'yes' to fair play and free speech." Quit laughing.

He may be interested in buying Twitter.com.

He paid big bucks to settle hacking lawsuits.

Now, Rupert Murdoch, chairman of News Corp the parent company of Fox News, is apparently readying himself for war with Google.

Seriously.

The Guardian reports:

Rupert Murdoch says he will remove stories from Google's search index as a way to encourage people to pay for content online.

[…]

In recent months, Murdoch his lieutenants have stepped up their war of words with Google, accusing it of "kleptomania" and acting as a "parasite" for including News Corp content in its Google News pages. But asked why News Corp executives had not chosen to simply remove their websites entirely from Google's search indexes – a simple technical operation – Murdoch said just such a move was on the cards.

"I think we will, but that's when we start charging," he said. "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 WSJ.com all you get is a paragraph and a subscription form."

The 78-year-old mogul's assertion, however, is not actually correct: users who click through to screened WSJ.com articles from Google searches are usually offered the full text of the story without any subscription block. It is only users who find their way to the story through the Wall Street Journal's website who are told they must subscribe before they can read further.

[…]

Murdoch's attitude towards the internet - which appeared to have thawed when he bought social networking site MySpace for $580m in 2005 - has stiffened more recently.

[…]

Additionally, it emerged that MySpace, which has struggled in the face of competition from Facebook in recent years, was due to fall short of its targets in a lucrative search deal with Google – a slip that could cost the site more than $100m in payments from the internet advertising giant.

Actually, it might not be that bad if Murdoch pulls News Corp content off of Google.  Think of the millions of people that would be inoculated from his... ummm "fair and balance" approach to journalism.

UPDATE: Google has responded. This Telegraph headline says it all: "Google: Rupert Murdoch Can Block Us If He Wants To."

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by worrierking (November 09, 2009 3:07 pm ET)
      4  
      If he gets his way, all News Corp content will no longer be free.

      That's great. We'll see how much the diehards are willing to pay for the seeds of "wisdom" that Rupert casts out into News Corps sea of ignorance.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by all your eyes (November 09, 2009 3:14 pm ET)
        3  
        I think it's $20/month for Newsday. The only reason to read Newsday in the first place is its sports coverage, which has declined in quality anyway. And $20/month? Really? With all the free news that's available? How many suckers would sign up for that deal? And the redesigned website is a monstrosity, to say the least. Let him go ahead and start charging for Fox Nation. I'm sure that'll be a cash cow. Plenty of good, God-fearing, socialist-hating Americans will undoubtedly pony up from the Social Security allowances to pay for that!
        Report Abuse
        • Author by pete592 (November 09, 2009 4:08 pm ET)
          4  
          I wouldn't pay $20 a month for the best porn in the world, let alone an alleged "news" website.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by congero6189599 (November 09, 2009 3:25 pm ET)
        3  
        Well now we know why Beck was going on his rant about how we had to guard against government being able to keep the internet open and free. The freedom he was speaking of being taken away was that of his bosses to charge for what now is "free."
        Report Abuse
    • Author by MeanMrSpicyMustard (November 09, 2009 3:21 pm ET)
      1  
      Finally, a Fox business model I can support. Hey Murdoch, making Fox News a premium channel would also lead to increased moneys. Just sayin'.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by toombsie (November 09, 2009 3:56 pm ET)
         
      I think this is great news. If google isn't indexing his media empire's websites then that is one less channel he has to expose the public to his Republican propaganda.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by epkklk851 (November 09, 2009 4:01 pm ET)
      2  
      Well, that was certainly a hard hitting interview.....NOT. But it was very interesting. It is all about money to Murdoch, he only cares about his bottom line. Frankly, I don't like that fact that all sorts of exceptions were made to allow him to buy Fox. I think it was a great miscarriage of justice. I would like to see more coverage of this interview on American media, I think Americans would benefit from knowing the kind of man who is running the most successful news network. I also think it is amazing the he can be so disengenous, the White House was correct in characterizing Fox as an arm of the Republican Party, one only needs to listen to Fox to hear the difference, except that a lot of the Fox viewers have become so propagandized that they are now immune to seeing the bias.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by mustardman (November 09, 2009 4:43 pm ET)
         
      This is great. Google with chew him up and spit him out without breaking a sweat!
      Report Abuse
      • Author by magnolialover (November 09, 2009 6:06 pm ET)
           
        Mostly because the folks at Google are a lot smarter than probably anyone Murdoch employs. There is a reason the best and smartest people in the world want to work for Google.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by Navin (November 09, 2009 6:29 pm ET)
           
        Maybe we should get on Google's case for indexing Fox "Noise" etc. content.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by gamphd2081 (November 10, 2009 8:37 am ET)
         
      Well, they could always use disingenuous "teaser" headlines that play fast and loose with the facts like the National Enquirer does. Oh wait ...
      Report Abuse