What is Digg?Sponsored by Gilt Man
It's a Gilt Man's world view!
giltman.com - Get gear and gadgets at up to 70% off. Shop like a guy, dress like a man. You're invited.
135 Comments
- n8ngrimm, on 11/10/2009, -1/+129Not in a million years. The only thing Rupert Murdoch can do is destroy the future of all his publications by forcing people to pay for what they can get for free. Information is free. People need to figure out a way to make money in spite of that fact.
- Gareth321, on 11/10/2009, -0/+84"Can Rupert Murdoch Kill Google?"
Ahahahahahaha - Blinker1315, on 11/10/2009, -1/+78No. Too little, too late.
- Dr.Fade, on 11/10/2009, -3/+55Deport Rupert Murdoch's fascist Aussie ass.
- DestroyedAUS, on 11/10/2009, -0/+49Hold-up, we don't want him either. Haha.
- exspasticcomics, on 11/10/2009, -0/+44hey stupid- if you take your websites off of google.. you're not going to kill google.. you're going to kill your websites.
- shutaro, on 11/10/2009, -4/+40***** THE RIAA!
- gnews, on 11/10/2009, -0/+32Social media is the gatekeeper to the internet & murdoch lost his invitation.
- JohnnySoftware, on 11/10/2009, -0/+31He has. He is selling "opinion".
- stonedgeek, on 11/10/2009, -0/+30I prefer the Google juggernaut to the Fox juggernaut
- frousfroud, on 11/10/2009, -2/+32The title is a joke.
- Expl0siv0, on 11/10/2009, -0/+26Short answer: haha.....no.
- Elohir, on 11/10/2009, -0/+25'Can Murdoch kill Google'..... by stopping it indexing Fox News?
Are you ***** high? - supersonicjim, on 11/10/2009, -0/+24Didn't he invest 100 million dollars in Myspace just as people were leaving it?
- drunkentoad, on 11/10/2009, -0/+24Hey! He got US citizenship about 7 years ago. Was more beneficial for tax reasons apparently. He's yours now. Sorry about that.
- toolidooli, on 11/10/2009, -1/+22Twenty years ago - a scary powerful man...
Nowadays a sad little silly man!
In twenty years - who was Robert Murdoch?
Strange how time can change power.
In a time not far from now people will google "Who was Rupert Murdoch" - KingRocket, on 11/10/2009, -0/+19No givesies backsies!
- BrandonSheppard, on 11/10/2009, -1/+20Yep. You can keep him.
- darkchild82, on 11/10/2009, -1/+19Nah, Murdoch will be dead before that.
- nurbsenvi, on 11/10/2009, -0/+16Goodbye News Corp.
- alphadoggs, on 11/10/2009, -1/+16Only way he'd be able to kill it would be to buy it, and that's not happening
- stockjones, on 11/10/2009, -0/+14No need to worry Rupert Murdoch is like the Al Davis of the media world. His time is over. He just doesn't know it.
- MarkyBear, on 11/10/2009, -1/+14Old media cannot kill new media.
- bobtheunholy, on 11/10/2009, -0/+14Perhaps Google will kill Rupert ;)
http://www.trilulilu.ro/Ana/6759f28d1c7727?video_g ... - rusty0101, on 11/10/2009, -0/+13Most sensible explanation I've read on this so far has been that what Murdoch is actually doing is convincing competitors to do what Murdoch 'plans' on doing, ahead of him. Meanwhile the effort involved in getting Murdoch's online editions of papers to not be indexed on Google will reach stumbling block after stumbling block. All the while the 'competition' which got it 'right' loosed market share, advertising revenue (lifeblood of the papers) and either 'folds' or is bought by Murdoch.
Yes, I know that all it takes is a robots.txt file with a command to not follow any links on the page. I'm pretty sure Murdoch does as well, which is why the above explanation is the only one that seems to make sense.
I'm not saying I like this idea, just that I think Murdoch knows that for general interest newspapers ad revenue is based on people who are interested in the story enough to go beyond the through the newspaper machine window view of the paper. - joeboy70, on 11/10/2009, -0/+11ha, someone really ought to explain to murdoch how the internet works. he doesn't seem to have quite grasped it yet.
- picturesnstuff, on 11/10/2009, -0/+10No
- InactiveUser, on 11/10/2009, -0/+10We don't accept economic refugees, sorry!
- arkwald, on 11/10/2009, -0/+9no he bought it for $500 million:)
- Elranzer, on 11/10/2009, -1/+10Murdoch's actions are going to kill NewsCorp, not Google.
- Aliwalla, on 11/10/2009, -0/+9For all the post modernists in the room:
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Can+Rupert+Murdoc ... - LokitheComplex, on 11/10/2009, -0/+8So the only way the owner of Fox news could survive would be to rely on the corruption and greed of a Communist dictatorship?
- DanteShamest, on 11/10/2009, -0/+8The opposite is more likely to happen.
- specineff13, on 11/10/2009, -0/+8No
- stockjones, on 11/10/2009, -0/+7Like everything else, their dogmatism will be gone and a new generation moves on..These are the old farts of the media age that want to keep media centralized so they can control and manipulate pricing. Good riddance.
- InactiveUser, on 11/10/2009, -0/+7Are you sure? His mother is still alive and she is prehistoric. She has 100 year old trees in her garden and she planted them!
I think she was the bitch that shot the last T rex.. - joculator, on 11/10/2009, -0/+7Pre-millennial thinking at it's best. The old guys have a tough time understanding an internet world, so all they can do is attack.
- DaviDTC, on 11/10/2009, -0/+6People are just waiting for them to die.
- Navicerts, on 11/10/2009, -0/+6He claims in the video there are no web sites making any "real" money in the world... I didn't realize Google was so poor.
I don't get it though, if he want's a pay-to-view site just make it pay to view.... What's so complicated about that? I could give ***** all if they did this. Hell, I could give ***** all if every news corporation in the world did this (under the assumption there would be better reporting), I still get to select my news source(s) and it's not going to be News Corp.
The argument is logical if he admits that his news is total crap today because he is not making money and can't afford to hire proper reports or do proper research. If this is the case sure, go ahead and charge for news. However, when I look at a profitable news agency, let's say oh Fox News™ is the reporting really better? Nope. Money is not why "a lot" of News Corp news is garbage, sorry Murdoch.... - brickbat, on 11/10/2009, -0/+6Just hurry up and die already. Bitch.
- sh0em0nkey, on 11/10/2009, -0/+6My thoughts exactly. My first thought was "Or you could be like all the other successful ventures and capitalize on the situation."
Pay walls haven't worked. Bloated pages of advertisements haven't worked. Over-priced online subscriptions haven't worked. And print is out of style.
Time to innovate. - drunkentoad, on 11/10/2009, -1/+7I watched a webinar today that showed that social media is very quickly catching up to the amount of overall web traffic search currently receives. He may be a fascist, war mongering prick, but there is no denying he is a powerful and smart fascist, war mongering prick. He's smart enough to see there is some benefit to his actions.
Having said that though, all major social media sites are increasing in traffic except for myspace. They lost something like 44% of their traffic over the past year. Sorry about that Ruppert. - thavi, on 11/10/2009, -1/+6Is this a joke? ***** no. The old ways are dying out.
- Djayness, on 11/10/2009, -1/+6You call that news?
- ThatNeilDude, on 11/10/2009, -0/+4Rupert Murdoch is a biggity bitch!
- zsavior, on 11/10/2009, -1/+5I don't know why people are so angry, I for one encourage this. As if this man has no idea how this works. See your publications get popular online because people can find them. If people can't find them....OH well I will just go to "The Economist" instead. You see what I did there I just named a completely different financial magazines not connected to News Corp Hey man he should really do this, because I am not going to stop using Google neither, are Billions of others. Its my homepages, as opposed to anything fox, MS, or Yahoo related.
Now I got even more incentive to use google, just to piss this spoiled old rich ***** off. Its the little things that get you through the day. People best way to go the extra mile on this, is look here, this is a list of Rupert Murdock's news corp properties. Stop going to them and spread the word that they are now blocked or going to be blocked to the not so tech savvy others. And watch those hits go down.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News_Corporation - davidlwatsonjr, on 11/10/2009, -0/+4well, regardless, in the end i guess we'll find out whether murdoch and his news corp cronies run the world as they think or if they're subject to the same dreadful judicator as everyone else...... public opinion :-O
- areyouserial, on 11/10/2009, -0/+4His theory is only plausible under cartel conditions. So long as many news sources are open, people will gravitate to free news. So long as smaller news organizations need eyeballs to establish a base, there will be news organizations willing to give their content away for free.
- Ne007, on 11/10/2009, -0/+4Murdoch wants to stay in control but the times have changed. Out with the OLD.
- HonoredMule, on 11/10/2009, -0/+4Information IS free, and journalists are not the source--they are filters.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 139 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is