Politico: News Corp. to disclose political donations
Reply
"[As] of April 12, [News Corp]’s board has 'adopted a new policy to publicy disclose corporate contributions annually on News Corporation’s corporate website.'"
Category Archives: Rupert Murdoch
Independent: Has Rupert Murdoch’s paywall gamble paid off?
"There are many who still wish the 79-year-old mogul [Rupert Murdoch] well, hopeful that he is at the vanguard of a cultural shift that will save newspapers. Yet elsewhere there is dismay among analysts, advertisers, publicists and even some reporters on the papers."
The Australian: New online business model will succeed, says Rupert Murdoch
Rupert Murdoch: "...the iPad is just one of many tablet or slate computers in the pipeline. News Corp fully intends to be across all those platforms too. ... It's going to be a success. Subscriber levels are strong. We are witnessing the start of a new business model for the internet."
Daggle: If Newspapers Were Stores, Would Visitors Be “Worthless” Then?
Essential reading from Danny Sullivan: "As the war of words ramps up between Google and some news publishers, the latest spin seems to be how “worthless” the traffic is that Google sends. In reality, the traffic probably does have value, but the newspapers are likely doing a terrible job of monetizing it."
BuzzMachine: Murdoch madness
Jeff Jarvis: "Murdoch himself says that Bing and even Google couldn’t afford to pay all content providers. And for what? For linking to them and giving them value? If anyone were paid ... who’s to say that Rupert Murdoch should be paid more than Josh Marshall? Or Wikipedia?"
FT.com: Murdoch’s plan may be the future
John Gapper: "[Either], as a lot of digital evangelists have suggested, [Murdoch] does not 'get' the internet; or he has looked at the figures and decided Google traffic is not worth very much. I think the latter is more plausible... [Traffic] drawn to news sites through links and search engines is better regarded as a marketing device to attract subscribers than as a big revenue stream."
paidContent: Video: Murdoch Making News Invisible To Search Engines? Not So Fast
"Here’s how Murdoch replied when [Sky News political editor David Speers] asked why he hasn’t blocked sites from being seen by search engines: 'I think we will. But that’s when we start charging. We do it already with the Wall Street Journal. We have a wall, but it’s not right to the ceiling.' ... He also raised the idea of challenging the doctrine of 'fair use' in court, then reigned it in a bit. “We’re getting a lot of advertising revenue so we’ll take that slowly.'"
FT.com: The death of the media mogul
John Gapper: "The challenge of the internet is that it blows up the control of distribution, ensuring that all content owners – from Rupert Murdoch to the lowliest blogger – compete on equal terms. Moguls can no longer exploit its scarcity by buying television spectrum or by owning printing presses. That is why media moguls have been pushed on to the defensive by a new breed of technology moguls such as Steve Jobs of Apple and Sergey Brin and Larry Page, co-founders of Google. Control of distribution has passed to people who make the software through which content passes."
Independent: Murdoch will pay for the end of free news
Jimmy Leach: "Murdoch has never shown any real understanding of the attention economy of the web, of the promiscuity of news consumers who cares more for the subject matter than the logo at the top. There is no brand loyalty on the web – especially not if you make your content difficult to find, and you charge people to read it when they’ve done so."
Vanity Fair: Rupert to Internet: It’s War!
"I have—in nine months of conversation with Murdoch, writing his biography after he bought the Journal, in 2007— often argued the nature of Internet culture with him to little avail. Murdoch can almost single-handedly take apart and re-assemble a complex printing press, but his digital-technology acumen and interest is practically zero. Murdoch’s abiding love of newspapers has turned into a personal antipathy to the Internet: for him it’s a place for porn, thievery, and hackers."
Roy Greenslade: Why Murdoch’s digital news cartel will fail
Alan Rusbridger in the comments: "Since 2002/3 our spending on guardian.co.uk (operational and capex) has exceeded revenue by just £20m. There's a crisis in the industry, and the Guardian is no more immune than anyone else, but it's a myth that we've plouged lunatic sums into digital."
Independent: Nice try – but you’re wrong, Mr Murdoch
Stephen Foley: "[If] newspaper executives on both sides of the Atlantic follow Mr Murdoch's apparent lead, I predict we will witness the collective suicide of scores of news organisations in the US and elsewhere. Some viable players will squander the chance to find a place in a new landscape of the news business, which is only just starting to be mapped out. ... I think it is probably suicidal even for Mr Murdoch's titles. The Sun and the New York Post get an "astronomical" number of hits when they have a celebrity scoop, he pleads, but he's talking about a few stories a week at best, and a scoop is only a scoop for a fraction of a second on the web. News Corp has copyright on the words its journalists write, but no patent on the facts they discover."
FT.com: Rivals sceptical of Murdoch’s charging plan
Sly Bailey: “I don’t think this is about what Rupert Murdoch wants. It’s about what the consumer is prepared to pay for. And why would you pay when you can get the same thing somewhere else for free?"
Guy Fawkes’ blog: Murdoch Bucks the Market
Guido Fawkes on charging for online news: "It is like the plan by canal owners of old to use the new railway trains to pull their barges along. Rupert will lose a lot of eyeballs and the advertising revenue that goes with that, niche market media (like this blog) will soak up mass market audiences that will not be willing to climb the paywall. This is a mis-step from the maestro. Bring it on…"