Rupert Murdoch, the man with one of the most recognisable
media names on the planet, has been making headlines online
in recent days through his determination to make Google pay -
for news content, that is.
On October 9, Murdoch announced it was time for internet
search engines and other websites to start to pay for any
news reports they currently took for free.
The owner of media giant NewsCorp said such sites would soon
have to pay for any content taken from his firm's many news
providers.
He was speaking at the World Media Summit in Beijing, where
his comments were backed by some of his competitors.
Associated Press boss Tom Curley said news providers were
being "exploited".
"We will no longer tolerate the disconnect between people who
devote themselves - at great human and economic cost - to
gathering news of public interest and those who profit from
it without supporting it," he said.
Murdoch has also continued agitating to try getting newspaper
readers to pay for online content when they log-in.
The Wall Street Journal is exclusively pay-per-view, apart
from a free online trial.
Not content with that battle, he decided that online search
engines, particularly Google, should pay media organisations
for creating the news generated by their reporters but shown
for free on Google.
Newser founder Michael Woolff wrote on his www.newser.com blog, that Microsoft was
a company Murdoch understood.
"When he talks about the technology business or about the
internet or Google, on at least one occasion, I've heard him
call Gadget, he invariable reverts to talking about
Microsoft, which on at least one occasion I've heard him call
IBM.
What is Microsoft going to do?"Murdoch still thinks Microsoft
has all the answers, which it once did, and that it could do
no wrong because it was so dominant, wrote Woolff.
Now, they might get together - Murdoch and Microsoft.
Murdoch's NewsCorp is furious that Google pays nothing for
the content it skims from the publishing empire and Microsoft
is fed up with seeing its own search engine service,
relaunched earlier this year as Bing, so comprehensively
outgunned.
Blogs around the world are now speculating Microsoft will pay
NewsCorp for displaying its content on Bing, on the
understanding that the publisher then prevents Google from
linking to any of its work.
NewsCorp would get paid when its content appears on a search
engine, while Microsoft could damage the quality of the
search results produced by Google.
If internet users choose a search service on the basis of
which one delivers the most comprehensive - but useful -
results, Bing might get an edge.
Google continues to play down the move, but if NewsCorp can
get this sort of deal, so can rival publishers.
The world's news organisations provide about 5% of the top
results in a typical Google search.
Woolff says that depriving Google of that content would not
be a killer blow, but it would make the internet search giant
take notice.
The aim is not to get rid of Google altogether but to drive
it to the negotiating table.
Google was also in the news for refusing to remove an image
of United States first lady Michelle Obama.
The image, altered to look like a monkey, was no longer
showing up under a Google image search at the time of
writing.
The blog site that posted it, "Hot Girls", removed it and
issued an apology in Chinese and English, reported the Los
Angeles Times.
The photo stirred controversy when Google declined to remove
it from the results page over free-speech concerns.
The apology, in shaky English, reads: "I am very sorry for
this article, and that this is the program automatically
issued a document from the article.
Do not the subject of race and politics make the discussion
too radical and sincere hope that the world is very
peaceful."
Most bloggers were in favour of Google not taking down the
image, citing the freedom of the internet.
However, that did not stop Google a couple of years ago
deciding to join with the Chinese Government and block some
sites for Chinese internet users.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
A name, residential address, and (preferably residential) telephone number is required from readers who comment on ODT Online. These details will not be visible to site visitors.