Not content with being the CEO of an ad-selling, phone-punting, operating-system-developing, online-apps-hosting, tablet-designing, and search-providing megacorp, Eric Schmidt apparently believes he's also a newspaper publisher. "We're all in this together," Schmidt was quoted by the Associated Press as having told the ink- …
The only time I even notice google is when ElReg mentions it.
Please stop giving them press, maybe they will go away :-/
I wonder which company Eric thinks
is best placed to benefit from newspapers having to run more ads on their websites...
Ok, so everyone agrees physical ink newspapers are on their way out - who wants to pay to read about stuff that happened before lunch time yesterday? Comic Store Guy in the The Simpsons has decreed that all normal people get their news off the interne, not TV or heaven forbid in print... So the internet is the way ahead, and newspaper companies have been clocking on to that. And charging for the news they provide.
What happens when everyone realises that sites like bbc.co.uk has the same news posted on its pages (albeit with apparently no political bias) is and will mostly likely always remain completely free due to the TV License?
I am sure that there are many similar stories of how emerging technology hits older technology and there are consequences arising. Steel mills, Detroit and cars? ...
One that springs to mind is: Bradford in the UK and associated towns or villages about it.
Before synthetic fibres were hugely available in gross amounts or before they were invented at all the world depended upon natural fibres.
Bradford UK was a great place for wool, raw straight from the sheep, goat wool through various stages of processing into garments, carpets or carpets, garments. And the area thrived on wool (probably going back to 13th century in one form or another with the first mills being worked by monks and religious. It was a huge money earner.
Then synthetic fibres appeared but Bradford did not have the wherewithall, nounce, insight, intelligence, intellect or will to deal with the emerging new technology. The result was mass poverty.
The present paper based printing industry is probably quite large, it probably has quite a few employees directly involved and secondary services employing a lot more people too.
Yes, there is pain to be had if change is painful but there is also intelligence to be brought to the issue as well.
I am not too sure if taking a King Canute and incoming tide model is a wise one but something managed is better than something unmanaged or mismanaged altogether.
No distribution costs?
Well, that's a bit rich coming from a Silicon Valley executive.
He knows very well that you need to pay for servers and parallel content delivery networks to run a professional news site, especially with video content, and bandwidth costs can be substantial to such a business. Actually, they have to be, because your site traffic determines how much you can charge for advertising.
If Silicon Valley continues to treat telcos and content providers in such a hubristic manner, it won't be long before nemesis comes.
You're doing it wrong
It always amuses me that Google manages to generate more revenue on just the opening paragraph of an article than the publisher manages to generate on the whole article.
Stupid newspaper companies.
I frequently have local papers decide to deliver me their paper for free for two weeks. They go straight in the recycling bin. I tell them if they call and say they are going to do it that I would rather they stop wasting paper on printing their paper since I sure don't look at it.
It isn't interesting if it is yesterday's news and I can't compare easily with other points of view using a pile of paper. It is quite simply useless to me.
google is a leech
I'd say google is pretty leech like.
Not only are large publishers effected, but so are small publishers. They try as much as they can to get good search results on Google, willingly stretching to help Google create more ad revenue for themselves... while not sharing in the revenue.
Google's smart. They know they could create a clearinghouse of advertising revenue and base it on the unpaid search results that got clicked on or showed up prominently in the results. Murdoch knows this too.
Or maybe it is time that publishers start quantifying the crawls by Google and charging them per access of a page of content. If Google wants users to pay for content, shouldn't they pay for their crawlers getting it too?
New business model, you bet!
- Tricked by satire? Get all your news from Facebook? You're in luck, dummy
- Feature TV transport tech, part 1: From server to sofa at the touch of a button
- Google straps on Jetpac: An app to find hipsters, women in foreign cities
- Updated Microsoft Azure goes TITSUP (Total Inability To Support Usual Performance)
- The Return of BSOD: Does ANYONE trust Microsoft patches?