What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
How to Make Your PC as Fast as the Day You Bought It view!
howlifeworks.com - What's the fastest way to restore a computer to its original blazing glory
59 Comments
- wallclimber, on 11/11/2009, -3/+96Q: What's behind Rupert Murdoch's trash-talking of Google?
A: A power-mad, old, senile, stubborn, block-headed, obscenely wealthy Dumbass (with a capitol "D") that's obviously suffering from an acute case of Google-envy, complicated by a whopping over-dose of self-delusion...
Yes? (Heh, that was just TOOOO easy)
Alrighty then, what's the next question?
- TheFounder, on 11/12/2009, -1/+25Hitwise said something like 50% of their traffic comes from Google Searches... he's an idiot.
- MattBlackCat, on 11/12/2009, -2/+25Easy - Rupert hates anything he can't compete against on his own terms.
- joculator, on 11/12/2009, -2/+18Nothing wrong with being old, but when that guy was born, Thomas Edison was recording Mary Had a Little Lamb to cylinders. It's tough for the old guys to grasp where media is going, things are moving so fast.
- Montey, on 11/12/2009, -3/+18Murdoch is coming from a position of fundamental misunderstanding of how the modern media technology of the Internet works, and how its modern users operate.
He fails to understand that the vast bulk of Internet news readers don't loyally stick to single news sources, like the days of old where people had newspaper subscriptions, they start getting their news via two sources: 1) A news digest or 2) a news search engine.
They use news digests because they can take in huge volumes of information in a very short time frame and can see what are the important items of the day by the number of headlines talking about the same topic. From there the reader can select the headlines they wish to read and follow the link to the providing news agency's website, even selecting multiple headlines to get a broader perspective of the topic of interest. For example, as I type this NewsNow shows me that there are some significant articles about the Middle East and I can click on a headline to go and read about them.
They use news search engines to look for current news relating to a specific subject. For example, if I search Google News for "Murdoch" it shows me that his anti-Google (et-al) rant is making a lot of headlines. This means the user doesn't need to randomly skip through random news agencies to see if their subject of interest is covered, they can find out if anyone is covering that topic in seconds.
Murdoch fails to understand that such news digests and news search engines generate huge hits for his news websites and that if he locks them out of NewsCorp content, it will only be NewsCorp that loses. The bottom lines is that Murdoch is old. He's a 1970's centralized media mogul living in a 2000's decentralized information economy. - 5thdigg, on 11/12/2009, -1/+10I wonder if the one person who buried you was murdoch himself...?
- akpanga, on 11/12/2009, -1/+8I think you said it better than I possibly could imagine. Dugg you up, up and up
- gerryk, on 11/12/2009, -1/+8Murdoch, just like the RIAA, MPAA and pretty much all 'traditional' publishing forms need to realise that their way of doing business is over. No amount of political lobbying and legal bullying is going to change that. They need to either learn how to change with the times or die like the dinosaurs they are.
- CryptiniteDemon, on 11/12/2009, -0/+7*Goes to google, searches, and pays nothing. Google profits.
Seems to work. - plizard, on 11/12/2009, -0/+6You people don't get it, he has a Yahoo! Account.
- akpanga, on 11/12/2009, -2/+8This man really needs help.
- Vaiper, on 11/12/2009, -1/+6Money.
- 3A2D50, on 11/12/2009, -0/+5I was curious as to how old he was (78), and found out his mother is still alive! o_O
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elisabeth_Murdoch_%28 ... - Joe_rigby, on 11/12/2009, -1/+6Please Google, call their bluff and de-list the ***** out of Fox News.
- 5thdigg, on 11/12/2009, -3/+8***** murdoch.
- diggjcarp, on 11/12/2009, -3/+7Murdoch just hates Google because it is run by progressives who don't watch "Fox News". I think that's really, really hard on him. poor guy.
- Alheithinn, on 11/12/2009, -1/+5Ditto, what akpanga said. I'd digg your comment twice if I could.
- wowsah156, on 11/12/2009, -2/+5Murdoch is too senile to see that his form of media business and journalism is over. Dead. Murdoch thrived on peoples ignorance , and his ability to keep his readers in the dark. He cant do that anymore because of the internet, so he is shafted.
Byebyes Murdoch. Byebyes. - drmangrum, on 11/12/2009, -0/+3I don't know about him being an idiot. Controversial? Sure. Whether you like him or not (or here on Digg, hate him with a passion reserved only for the likes of Hitler), the man is one of the wealthiest and most powerful men in the world (he who controls the media....), you don't get to that position accidentally.
What people should be asking themselves is: What's Murdoch's grand plan? It certainly isn't that people use search engines to navigate and view his media sites, that makes little sense as it's so easy to block. You can bet the man has an ace up his sleeve, we just don't know what game he's playing. - bigteebo, on 11/12/2009, -2/+5He trash talks out of fear.
- diggit83, on 11/12/2009, -1/+4Maybe not idiot, because he has built quite an empire, but hes WAY out of touch with the times now, and that is crystal clear.
- LostSoul83, on 11/13/2009, -0/+2It would be funnier to see some company hire employees to rewrite all of the news stories that appear on his network and then make loads of cash off of said stories. After all, you can't copyright the goings-on in the world.
- dalittle, on 11/12/2009, -1/+3Rupert Murdoch does not understand technology as shown by his purchase of myspace. Google should start charging News Corp businesses to be listed in the search engine for all the traffic and money that they are sending his way.
- kenlaw, on 11/12/2009, -1/+3The real answer from the article:
When whistling past the graveyard, it's wise to keep one's options open. It's a maneuver Murdoch excels at. Cory Doctorow, Jason Calacanis, and Mark Cuban hypothesize that Murdoch is gunning for an arrangement in which a search engine from the second tier, such as Bing or Ask, pays him big money for exclusive rights to crawl his sites and display results. In other words, applying the MySpace/Google formula—which expires next year—to his newspaper sites. Good luck with that, Rupert! - gnixon70, on 11/12/2009, -2/+4It's what happens to old dinosaurs that refuse to adapt. They die out.
- mrjdavila, on 11/12/2009, -0/+2I like your reasoning. Thanks for putting this so eloquently clear.
- PiddlyD, on 11/12/2009, -0/+2Unfortunately, reason and logic have no place in the comment section of Digg, so I fully expect to be buried. :) Nice to know that some people think critically still, though.
And for what it is worth, most of us are not like this, we'll stick with our ideals and principles, even onto our own economic ruin. This isn't a justification for cheating, lying and unethical behavior, either, although it could be misconstrued as such. It is simply an observation that successful businessmen are fluid and adaptable. They also actually tend to be survivors in crisis situations, because they're independent, criticial thinkers who will constantly self-assess a situation and readjust their plans according to their risk assessment.
Us "average people" make a plan and often just unyieldingly stick with it, even if it takes us right over the edge and plunging into the abyss. People like this look, stop, and say, "I'm going to try something else, you guys keep going that way if you want". Then, later on, after they are rescued, they tell the news about how horrible it was to watch their collegues march toward their doom. - Quaterni0n, on 11/12/2009, -0/+2conservapedia.com
- skztr, on 11/12/2009, -1/+3"posturing" when you haven't got a leg to stand on is called "flailing around on the floor like a baby". That's just simple physics.
- specialK16, on 11/12/2009, -0/+2"No amount of political lobbying and legal bullying is going to change that."
Don't give them ideas bro. - MWeather, on 11/12/2009, -0/+2I doubt he even uses the internet, given his stance.
- inajeep, on 11/12/2009, -0/+1How about stupidhead or poopyface. When the man's ideals are so condemnable the mind balks at finding an adequate insult to match the man's ability to subvert and entire news organization to his views.
- MtheoryX, on 11/12/2009, -0/+1He's not your bro, pal.
- MtheoryX, on 11/12/2009, -0/+1Sounds like Hulu.
- drmangrum, on 11/12/2009, -1/+2@diggit83
Out of touch? Perhaps, but I'm not convinced.
Even if that is the case, he has a plan. You can bet his plan will make him money even if the desired outcome isn't what he's trying to accomplish. - m0n0kr0m3, on 11/12/2009, -0/+1Why are people not boycotting all Murdoch owned companies? I'd like to see the WSJ rot on the newsstand.
- lateralus, on 11/12/2009, -0/+1worst.analogy.ever.
- digghasnoethics, on 11/12/2009, -3/+4Said it before, say it again. Murdoch is planning to go into the walled garden of apple's tablet, along with other publishers scared of the Internet.
http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2009/10/rumor-ap ... - Serinus, on 11/12/2009, -0/+1drmangrum is right. He's certainly not a dumbass or an idiot. Just because his comments might not be on the mark this time, doesn't mean he doesn't know the truth. I assure you, the man has a plan.
- Moralogic, on 11/12/2009, -0/+1Even facts and logic.
- miaow, on 11/13/2009, -0/+1I dont get it either. google news is a link for his papers. he uses youtube as rich media. i can only assume he doesnt use the internet
- TheFounder, on 11/12/2009, -0/+1what he's buying Ask and putting his content there and banning it from Google... lol.. so we'll have a republican internet and republican search engine.. and one for the rest of us?
- cfuse, on 11/13/2009, -0/+1When you as old as he is, one more year of business as usual (with all the price gouging that entails) could be a significant percentage of the time you've got left. Don't expect someone who's about to die to start innovating.
- gradient01, on 11/12/2009, -1/+2Yea, Rupert is hateful ... hate and only hate is what drives the man. Oh, you forgot stupid and evil ... and racist... and he hates kids too... oh *****, no there's more... he's a homophobe and a nazi ... and he's old ...
- FyberOptic, on 11/13/2009, -0/+1He's just jealous that his empire is comprised of old media and old people.
- DittoMuch, on 11/12/2009, -0/+0yeah works great from googles perspective, not so sure it works for the content provider. Personally I hate Rupert Murdoch and his entire 'news' organization but the business model of the last 5 years has proven not to work for newspapers and as a businessman I think he is making the right call. Then again google makes it easy to not be indexed and there was no reason for Murdoch to be so public about this.
- eh123, on 11/12/2009, -1/+1That's because you're not very bright and would get eaten alive in any significant business negotiation. It's called posturing.
- PiddlyD, on 11/12/2009, -5/+5One observation that people like this author seem to miss in their venom and hatred...
Most successful, shrewd, capitalist businessmen are exactly that. They're businessmen, first and foremost. All successful businessmen seem to be much better at drawing the distinction between *ideals* and realities - something that idealist liberals inevitably despise them for. (And you can almost universally translate "idealist liberals" into "those that become the victims of the realities that face the capitalist businessmen who employ them".)
To that end, Rupert Murdock changing course in midstream, even when he has indicated his course would be completely contrary, is probably a pretty damned good indication of why he is such an obscenely wealthy, successful businessman. He is not concerned with the idealism of sticking to a course because of principles, he is an expert at assessing realities and adjusting his plans and goals accordingly.
When a politician promises me one thing, and then does something completely different in his or her own interest I am rightfully disappointed. When a businessman does the same thing - there should be little surprise. If you were a shrewd businessman yourself, you should have been able to predict his actions in the second case.
Businessmen who cannot adapt their goals, strategies and ideals according to their current business climate end up out of business. You will find no difference between Murdoch, Gates, Grove, Elisson, Trump, or Jobs in this basic principle. They will tell their workers, "We are strong, we are doing fine, we are going to expand" and weeks later lay off significant portions of their workforce. Ultimately, these decisions may not be what these business leaders would ideally WANT to do, but if they don't, then their competitors surely will, and that will remove the need to make difficult decisions from their plate completely, because they will be out of business.
In particular, the author discussed how Murdock discusses the "glories" of a free market economy while lining up for market subsidies. This kind of naivety in journalism or in political or personal philosophy drives me nuts. The fact is that if Murdock does not leverage these subsidies, his competitors will, allowing them to lower costs, increase profits and compete more effectively. If the subsidies exist, Murdock is forced to leverage them.
Andy Grove, Chairman and former CEO of Intel, several years back, responding to complaints about Intel outsourcing work, stated the official company policy, "Intel is unable to find enough skilled individuals in the domestic market trained in science and math to fill our positions so we are forced to look to H1B visas and outsourcing". He then went on to quietly add, "if you disagree with these actions, you have the right to change the laws, and you should". I am paraphrasing there - but that was the general gist of it.
If Intel doesn't outsource, then AMD will. If AMD outsources, they will be more competitive with Intel. This will hurt Intel, it will hurt Intel stockholders, it will hurt Intel dominance of the semiconductor industry. Intel is in business to best serve the stockholders, to be the dominant force in their industry, and to maximize their profits. It doesn't really matter if the leadership agrees personally or not with a policy that they can leverage - they simply must in order to effectively compete.
Bury away because this is about Rupert Murdoch and because you have an unreasonable bias against Fox - but that doesn't change the underlying truth of this, regardless of the successful businessman you put in place of Mr. Murdock.
And that is the ultimate reason why this article on Slate fails to be effective. - ghostborg, on 11/12/2009, -1/+1Never heard of Slate.
-
Show 51 - 60 of 60 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is