> You switch to an alternative: Bing, DDG etc.. What makes you think Bing or DDG wants to pay news companies to share their link and drive traffic to these com

> You switch to an alternative: Bing, DDG etc.. What makes you think Bing or DDG wants to pay news companies to share their link and drive traffic to these companies? If anything, forcing revenue sharing would cause a small search engine like DDG out of business as it tries to scale up. If you wanted to start up a search engine today, imagine what these extra costs would do? > If they are smart they react with legislation forcing more 'choice' in search on every level. In your anti-google crusade, you are missing the point. It makes no sense for search engines to pay news or any company to drive traffic to those companies. If anything, the news companies/etc should be paying search engines if you really think about it. It isn't a Goolge vs Bing/DDG/etc issue. It's a Google/Bing/DDG/etc vs news/media companies issue. If these news websites don't want to be part of google search, then they can easily exclude themselves via robots.txt.