7 Comments

Summary:

In a recent interview as part of a National Press Club event, News Corp. Chairman Rupert Murdoch reiterated his belief that Google and other news aggregators are stealing his content, and his commitment to paywalls. But so far Murdoch seems to have a bandwagon of one.

Rupert Murdoch, the octogenarian chairman of News Corp., was at it again during a recent National Press Club interview at George Washington University — it being his routine bashing of news aggregators such as Google and Yahoo (although Google is typically the only one Murdoch mentions during his tirades), along with a call to arms for the newspaper industry, which Murdoch says must eventually embrace paywalls whether it wants to or not. Readers might not like them, the News Corp. founder said, but will wind up paying for the news “when they’ve got nowhere else to go.” The Murdoch-owned Times of London and Sunday Times are both expected to launch pay access in June. According to a number of reports about the interview, Murdoch said:

We are going to stop people like Google or Microsoft or whoever from taking stories for nothing…there is a law of copyright and they recognise it. They take [news content] for nothing. They have got this very clever business model.

He also said of the iPad:

I got a glimpse of the future last weekend with the Apple iPad. It is a wonderful thing. If you have less newspapers and more of these…it may well be the saving of the newspaper industry. It doesn’t destroy the traditional newspaper, it just comes in a different form.

But it is Murdoch’s comments about “having nowhere else to go” that are the most revealing when it comes to the aging newspaperman’s real agenda, because the reality is that News Corp. putting up paywalls at all of its newspapers isn’t going to really succeed unless everyone else does so as well. Ever since he decided not to remove the paywall at the Wall Street Journal — something he had hinted he might do before buying the paper — Murdoch has been trying desperately to get a bandwagon rolling on the issue, to get as many other major newspapers to join him in erecting paywalls.

Even if News Corp.’s strategy is more about shoring up the declining readership of the print product than about reaching new online readers, the fact is that Murdoch is going to have a hard time of it if he is the only one blocking off his content.

Then readers will have somewhere else to go — to his competitors, such as The Guardian, which has repeatedly argued against paywalls and has an entire content distribution strategy based on free access and an open API (application programming interface) that allows anyone to use the paper’s content. A bandwagon of one isn’t going to do much good, and Murdoch knows it — which is why whenever he’s handed a microphone he sings the same song.

Post and thumbnail photos courtesy of Flickr user World Economic Forum.

  1. I used to be a subscriber to WSJ online but they got too greedy and jacked up the price to $179 per year (starting from $49 per year). I canceled my subscription. While I am willing to pay for valuable (in my opinion) content, the price has to be appropriate.

    In a similar way, I wouldn’t pay $5 per week for the digital version of Time.

    Share
  2. I can sympathize with the old fellow. Creating and delivering all that content can’t be cheap. And then Google and blogs et al essentially grab it, repackage it and make money off of it.

    I’d be mad as hell, too.

    But that doesn’t change his fundamental problem: the cost structure for newspapers means they will go extinct. I’m happy to pay. I’m happy to pay about $9/month for WSJ on my iPad. Or $5.50/month for the New York Times. I bet at that rate, though, both companies would still go out of business.

    Share
  3. a visionary who has lost his vision

    Share
  4. [...] just doesn’t get it Murdoch misunderstands the Internet news world Murdoch getting lonely inside his walled garden No, Mr. Murdoch, they’ll stop [...]

    Share
  5. Rupert Murdoch gazes from his Walled Garden, at Steve Jobs in his Walled Garden

    Share
  6. I’ve never understood these statements like “We are going to stop people like Google or Microsoft or whoever from taking stories for nothing…”

    What does Google take? Google doesn’t re-post news stolen from other sites, they just link TO the sites where the news is. If you want to read the article, you click the link and go to the site that wrote it. Google probably drives 50% (or more) of the traffic that sites like NYT and WSJ get in a day.

    This is like saying the newspaper machine is stealing the front page of the paper because people can read it through the window without actually buying it.

    Share
  7. [...] has a problem with news aggregators like Google, which monetize other people’s content.  Critics say Murdoch’s time has passed, and that putting up paywalls would hurt readership.  While this is true, readership really isn’t the problem for news media, it’s [...]

    Share

Comments have been disabled for this post