Skip to: Content
Skip to: Site Navigation
Skip to: Search

THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 26, 2009
| Subscribe to Newser's RSS feeds RSS | Follow Newser on Twitter Twitter


12

Google a 'Tapeworm:' WSJ Exec

Share

(Newser) – Content aggregators like Google—and yes, the humble site you’re reading now—are “parasites or tech tapeworms in the intestines of the Internet,” Robert Thomson, editor of the Wall Street Journal, told fellow News Corp. paper the Australian last week. He warned that the “mistaken perception” that online content should be free “will be a catalyst for action, and the moment is nigh.”

Both the Journal and the Australian are owned by Rupert Murdoch, who last week said newspapers must begin charging for their online content. “Readers have been socialized—wrongly I believe—that much content should be free,” Thomson says. He dismisses Google’s argument that it drives traffic to the content provider, because “the whole Google sensibility is inimical to traditional brand loyalty. Google encourages promiscuity—shamelessly so.”

Tuesday editions of Barron's and The Wall Street Journal are on a New York newsstand, Tuesday, July 31, 2007.
Tuesday editions of Barron's and The Wall Street Journal are on a New York newsstand, Tuesday, July 31, 2007.   (AP Photo/Mark Lennihan)
A woman talks on her cell phone while using a laptop at a ceremony to launch Google's free music download service for China in Beijing, China, Monday, March 30, 2009.
A woman talks on her cell phone while using a laptop at a ceremony to launch Google's free music download service for China in Beijing, China, Monday, March 30, 2009.   (AP Photo/Alexander F. Yuan)
Rupert Murdoch speaks at a news conference in New York in this file photo of Oct. 20, 2006.
Rupert Murdoch speaks at a news conference in New York in this file photo of Oct. 20, 2006.   (AP Photo/Mark Lennihan, FILE)
« Prev« Prev | Next »Next » Slideshow
12 comments
VIEWING:
 
shonangreg
Apr 6, 09 10:48 AM CDT
Google and newser are not the problem at all here. It is the massive competition of all sites for relatively free eyes that is their problem. If they are incapable of sufficiently monetizing the current situation, which I do not trust them on, then they need to band together and create a big enough association of online news sites to lure people to pay to see member sites. It won't work unless there are LOTS of good sites contained. And if they price it too high, another group could be started with another collection of thousands of sites and undercut them on price. None of us have much to fear from this. Snippets and rewrites would still be available for free, maybe after a bit of a delay, but for the best stuff, we'd have to pay a bit each month to get uninhibited access to all member sites. This would also begin to fund good journalism again. The ball is really in the news sites court, and protesting google news and newser is just totally missing the point. Reply
Vote up! Vote down!
0
Thinker
Apr 6, 09 11:03 AM CDT
I used to love reading a newspaper, but when journalism lost its ethics, I gave up on the newspaper. I will not pay for propaganda of the rich in print or electronic form. Murdoch lost his edge, his reasoning ability and my respect a long time ago, and I will not go back to fake news, no matter how cheap. Reply
Vote up! Vote down!
0
IN RESPONSE:
Mad
Apr 6, 09 12:05 PM CDT
Precisely correct. Gone forever are the days when you could believe it if it was in print. Seems one has to verify all sources of information these days
Vote up! Vote down!
0
IN RESPONSE:
airron14
Apr 6, 09 12:28 PM CDT
Come on, those days never existed.
Vote up! Vote down!
0
IN RESPONSE:
Robert_Dada
Apr 6, 09 12:46 PM CDT
You got that right airron. When did we ever have information sources free of bias and propaganda?
Vote up! Vote down!
0
LEAVE A
COMMENT
Comment Policy
Facebook ConnectPost this comment to Facebook?

After connecting you will have the option to post your comment on your Facebook profile.