1. This will not work b/c I read articles from the Wall Street Journal online…just not at the WSJ…I read it on a blog or via some other RSS feed. I may not even know it is WSJ content, it just sort of makes its way around.
2. Didn’t Twitter essentially already do this today? MS and Google are going to pay 15 million and 10 million a year respectively to twitter for the rights to display tweets in search results…MS and google are paying a large content provider for the right to display content. I don’t see how Murdoch’s move is any different that that (besides the fact he is saying he will only give a deal to MS, but really he is just negotiating…he will give it to both if the $ is right). I do not see any problem with this (Google and MS make plenty of $).
3. Okay so clearly MS would do this to try and kill Googles profitability. If you are going to pay people to list their content in searches (btw I would love to have my blog at the top of searches let alone get paid for it to be there, hehe). So where does the line get drawn? Do medium sized blogs try and get paid for their content? This really creates a shit storm on the internet. I guess it goes as far as MS wants it to go, if MS gets exclusive deals with enough big content providers and leaves Google’s search with shitty/worthless results…then both MS and Google’s $ will be running dry. MS knows it can deal with this b/c it makes so much money (7 billion USD a year?) from selling Windows and its other software, so MS wants to kill Google’s main revenue stream b4 Google gets too far into competition with MS in the OS and software markets.
4. In general I could care less if Murdoch’s content is exclusive to MS, the question I have is about the freedom of information we have so-far enjoyed on the internet. If heretofore Google or Microsoft’s search results have been based on algorithm xyz and you have gotten legitimate search results based on that algorithm, with some ads on the side also based on your search, it seems like now bullshit results might start creeping into your formerly legit search results? I mean, if MS or Google is paying X million dollars a year for the right to display a Murdoch article, they are going to damn make sure that article shows up on the top of the first page right? I haven’t’ really wrapped my head around this part yet. If MS and Google pay for the right to display Murdoch’s content in search results are they going to alter the algorithms to make sure that content gets preferential results over other content?
2009/12/22 - 04:13