The Times and Google: what's going on?

[paulnolan]

Comments

[suzermagoozer]

thanks for posting this.
i was wondering when this would begin.

i guess i can understand that the newspapers need to make money, i expect that they would find a way to combat poaching.

while i'd like to see a paper of record remain available on Google search, i think google should have to pay something, right?

[ninevoltmoose]

I would have to disagree with you. Yes, the process of collecting and disseminating newsworthy information is something with value, perhaps with more value today than ever. However, the application of old business models to a new medium has never worked well, and have generally ended very poorly indeed. What news outlets like News Corp fail to comprehend is that the Internet operates off a model of abundance, rather than the scarcity model they grew their empires upon. Information, by its very nature is copyable, and the Internet merely facilitates this copying process in a more efficient manner. Google is merely a content aggregator, they make their money off of making information easier to find. In my opinion, and the views of many many media observers and anylists, news organizations need to find a new way to make their business profitable without imposing a set of draconian practices which run counter to the way the Internet fundamentally operates.

[karikinetic]

I remember when NYT had a paywall and no one paid. So, y'know, they took it down. Now they're doing it again! Way to stay fresh, Murdoch!

[brewsternorth]

Yeah, either people didn't go to NYT or they found ways to circumvent the paywall. It's a fool's errand.

[bluescreenmofo]

What an idiot. You don't go against Google. You just don't.

[gmth]

Don't let the doorknob hit ya on the way out.

[neev]

Well. I'm sure this is going to end well.