This surprised me…

I was actually caught off guard by this article which reports Google plans to allow publishers to “set a limit on the number of free news articles people can read through Google.” This is apparently in response to Rupert Murdoch who thinks Google is a plagiarist. I am baffled, and frankly this makes me believe the reports that Murdoch has never used Google. He is a fan of the paywall model of news site, which is fine.  It is best exemplified by the New York Times or Wall Street Journal websites, where many of the articles require a subscription. These sites aren’t unsuccessful, and there are people who are willing to pay for the value of their content. However, from my perspective Murdoch has it wrong when it comes to cutting off Google, particularly when it comes to this compromise. I think it it clear that by keeping me out of his sites through my use of Google, I am less likely to see the value in subscribing to the site than if I am allowed to freely access articles from Google. In fact, if I am not linked to a Newscorp site through Google, I’m not going to see a Newscorp site at all. Doesn’t this worry Murdoch? How is he going to attract new subscribers? What really surprises me though, is that Google has willingly made this strange compromise. I think Google should not be afraid of being blocked by Newscorp, but Newscorp and others should be leery of blocking Google.

Advertisement