3 ms·
It was what, 7 or so years ago that Rupert Murdoch was threatening to remove all links and content from Google, and News Corp were saying: "The traffic which c
by iamben 9y ago
It was what, 7 or so years ago that Rupert Murdoch was threatening to remove all links and content from Google, and News Corp were saying:
"The traffic which comes in from Google brings a consumer who more often than not read one article and then leaves the site. That is the least valuable of traffic to us… the economic impact [of not having content indexed by Google] is not as great as you might think. You can survive without it."
Oh how times change. Another example of a situation where a little bit of forward thinking, rather than clinging to an established model with a blinkered attitude, would have gone a long way.
- panarky 9y agoIt's curious that the publishers' trade group lobbying Congress to allow them to form a cartel made their argument in a Wall Street Journal editorial. "How Antitrust Undermines Press Freedom" https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-antitrust-undermines-press-freedom-1499638532 https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-antitrust-undermines-press-... Since the WSJ is paywalled the public can't even read their argument. What's the rationale here? Does paywalling their argument get more subscribers for the WSJ? Or does it intentionally limit visibility to elites likely to have a subscription while keeping the public in the dark?