Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 23rd Nov 2009 14:58 UTC
In the News It is no secret that Microsoft is doing whatever it can to eat away at Google's immense market share of the search market, with Bing being its most ambitious effort yet. Well, it seems the battle just got a whole lot dirtier, as The Financial Times has uncovered news that Microsoft has approached several news content providers, offering them money if they "de-index" their sites from Google.
Thread beginning with comment 396090
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Buisness in the US
by l3v1 on Tue 24th Nov 2009 09:07 UTC in reply to "RE: Buisness in the US"
l3v1
Member since:
2005-07-06

If I were a content provider as vast as NewsCorp, I'd tell Google to scr*w themselves


A bit peculiar, that argument. If you were a content provider and there would be no Google to deliver your content as results to user queries, then many users wouldn't know about your content. We're well past that age of the Internet where a few dozen sites provided contents that everyone knew about. Yes, you could advertise in printed media, tv, or street ads, but that wouldn't be as effective. Telling your cash cow to screw itself would mean screwing yourself, which I don't think you're really after.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Buisness in the US
by tomcat on Tue 24th Nov 2009 18:58 in reply to "RE[2]: Buisness in the US"
tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

A bit peculiar, that argument. If you were a content provider and there would be no Google to deliver your content as results to user queries, then many users wouldn't know about your content. We're well past that age of the Internet where a few dozen sites provided contents that everyone knew about. Yes, you could advertise in printed media, tv, or street ads, but that wouldn't be as effective. Telling your cash cow to screw itself would mean screwing yourself, which I don't think you're really after.


Most news sites on the Web are fed by a handful of premium news sources (AP, NewsCorp, etc). There is clearly synergy among those organizations to adjust the way that they've been distributing/licensing the news to downstream sites. When that happens, everybody that feeds on them will be affected. At best, they have to pay AP, NewsCorp et al (which is not a bad business); at worst, they don't get the news feeds anymore, AP, NewsCorp make their money through walled gardens, Google doesn't have anything to index (or indexes lower-quality news), and news search is driven through Bing. Moreover, the blogosphere, which primarily feeds on premium news and links directly to articles, would no longer be able to private access to the walled gardens. So, really, no one should pretend that changing distribution models would be a wash -- or a pin prick.

Edited 2009-11-24 19:00 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[4]: Buisness in the US
by Praxis on Tue 24th Nov 2009 19:27 in reply to "RE[3]: Buisness in the US"
Praxis Member since:
2009-09-17

I don't think they have seriously proposed a paywall yet, the bing plan just puts it off the google search engine. So bloggers would still be able to direct link to their hearts content, and those who use RSS feeds or something similar wouldn't be effected at all.

If they do try a complete paywall, then they would need to make sure that everyone institutes a paywall, since if even one sizable news organization didn't, it all falls apart and the guy who didn't shut his website off gets all the traffic. Even if everyone does set up a paywall, they still have absolutely no defense against someone reading the article and posting a summary and analysis elsewhere. Not to mention the rampant use of copy/paste. Its the inherent difficulty in try to control the distribution of text, the most easily copyable medium available, through the internet, the most advanced content distribution network ever. And if the content isn't time sensitive, well I think the vast majority of people will wait a couple of hours until it shows up on the blogs or twitter or wherever. If a story isn't time sensitive, it doesn't have much direct value since it will be everywhere for free in a matter of time, whether its behind a paywall or not.

Reply Parent Score: 1