3 ms·

Yes, News needs Google, they just hate to admit it. Knowing that's true, Murdoch is trying to maneuver News into a better bargaining position with Google. Ther

by flipper 17y ago

Yes, News needs Google, they just hate to admit it. Knowing that's true, Murdoch is trying to maneuver News into a better bargaining position with Google. There can be no better sign of who is most powerful in this struggle than the fact that all the threats and overtures are coming from News and Microsoft. Google is the Gorilla, Microsoft is the Chimp, and News is the customer who wants the vendor to pay to provide their service.

bilbo0s 17y ago
I can't tell whether or not I agree with you two. If you are implying that Wall Street Journal readers would not subscribe and read Wall Street Journal without Google, then I disagree. I think the comment by @mynameishere is correct, for the Wall Street Journal, Google is probably sending a lot of riff-raff over. You don't want those users. Even if they click on the NetJet or Jaguar ad, I doubt they could afford it. And most of them probably do not know what American Express Black is. If, however, you are saying that Murdoch and Google are playing a giant game of chicken, then I would agree.
- astrec 17y ago
  The Wall Street Journal is a prestige masthead, but comprises only a minor part of News Corp's print media holdings - so no, I don't even consider it significant in relation to the current Google play: Murdoch has bigger fish to fry.
- flipper 17y ago
  Yes, giant gsme of chicken. I don't think Murdoch has any intention of blocking Google, he's trying a North Korean-style gambit - "I am renowned for being difficult and dangerous, give me what I want or I'll do something nasty." Murdoch threatening to block Google is like Kim Jong Il proposing to bomb South Korea - absolutely suicidal, but given how "crazy" he is no one can count against him doing it. Like most North Korean gambits, it's mostly posturing but the fact that it comes from a potentially threatening source means it has to be carefully considered.
chrischen 17y ago
I honestly think it's foolish to think that news, or News Corp, needs Google search. Just in my personal experience I've never gotten news from searching on Google, and I'm sure many others can say the same. I use google to find something I already know of, not to find stuff I don't know about. I think social networks have more power in spreading news. Obviously news and magazines thrived before Google, and even the internet. They're still large and powerful, even if they are starting to wane.
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]

by flipper 17y ago

bilbo0s 17y ago

I can't tell whether or not I agree with you two. If you are implying that Wall Street Journal readers would not subscribe and read Wall Street Journal without Google, then I disagree. I think the comment by @mynameishere is correct, for the Wall Street Journal, Google is probably sending a lot of riff-raff over. You don't want those users. Even if they click on the NetJet or Jaguar ad, I doubt they could afford it. And most of them probably do not know what American Express Black is. If, however, you are saying that Murdoch and Google are playing a giant game of chicken, then I would agree.

astrec 17y ago
The Wall Street Journal is a prestige masthead, but comprises only a minor part of News Corp's print media holdings - so no, I don't even consider it significant in relation to the current Google play: Murdoch has bigger fish to fry.
flipper 17y ago
Yes, giant gsme of chicken. I don't think Murdoch has any intention of blocking Google, he's trying a North Korean-style gambit - "I am renowned for being difficult and dangerous, give me what I want or I'll do something nasty." Murdoch threatening to block Google is like Kim Jong Il proposing to bomb South Korea - absolutely suicidal, but given how "crazy" he is no one can count against him doing it. Like most North Korean gambits, it's mostly posturing but the fact that it comes from a potentially threatening source means it has to be carefully considered.

chrischen 17y ago

I honestly think it's foolish to think that news, or News Corp, needs Google search. Just in my personal experience I've never gotten news from searching on Google, and I'm sure many others can say the same. I use google to find something I already know of, not to find stuff I don't know about. I think social networks have more power in spreading news. Obviously news and magazines thrived before Google, and even the internet. They're still large and powerful, even if they are starting to wane.

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]