7
News Corp may shun Google for Bing
The Web sites of Bing and Microsoft are displayed on a computer monitor in San Anselmo, Calif.
To view this content, Javascript must be enabled and Adobe Flash Player must be installed.
TEXT OF STORY
Kai Ryssdal: If you have used the new search engine from Microsoft, Bing, you know it has something that Google doesn't have: really pretty pictures on its home page. But Bing may soon have something else that Google doesn't. Something a good deal more valuable, too -- The Wall Street Journal, the New York Post and other content that's owned by Rupert Murdoch's News Corp.
There are reports today that Microsoft's trying to do a deal with News Corp. Nothing merger or acquisition-like. But quite possibly bigger. Microsoft would pay News Corp to keep its content on Bing and off Google. Joel Rose reports now on the latest round in the never-ending search wars.
JOEL ROSE: Rupert Murdoch has made no secret of his disdain for Google and other search engines that link to content for free. Here's how he described them earlier this month in an interview with Sky News Australia, part of his vast media empire.
RUPERT Murdoch: The people who just simply pick up everything and run with it, and steal our stories. We say they steal our stories; they just take them.
Now Murdoch may take them back. News Corp is reportedly in talks to give Bing exclusive access to its content for a price and "de-list" that content from Google.
Forrester Research analyst Shar VanBoskirk says the deal could be a coup for Microsoft.
SHAR VanBoskirk: A way to kinda show that they're serious about search, a way to steal some momentum from Google, and a way to drive traffic to Bing.com.
Neither company would comment on the reports. But critics think such a deal could hurt News Corp more than it hurts Google. Sure, News Corp might collect a hefty fee from Microsoft. But News Corp's Web sites would lose the traffic they get from Google.
Here's Google spokesman Gabriel Stricker.
Gabriel Stricker: The value that we view ourselves providing to news publishers is basically the traffic we send from Google news and Web search to them, on the order of about 100,000 clicks every minute.
Those clicks translate into millions of dollars in advertising revenue for News Corp, and millions in search revenue for Google. It seems that Rupert Murdoch may be willing to accept less traffic to keep Google from making money off his content for free.
I'm Joel Rose for Marketplace.
I will admit that I used to use Google News for the majority of my news intake, and didn't mind so much the truncated paywall articles I was forced to read in some circumstances. Keep in mind that I buy the WSJ at the newsstand once or twice per week, so I'm not missing much there either.
Mr. Murdoch and company may be missing something though - I stopped getting my news from Google News or search results and started getting it from directed RSS feeds using my homepage and the Google reader. Though often the articles yielded by these methods are reposts of or linked commentary on said news stories, the fact remains that by using community or third party aggregated links via RSS I'm completely bypassing the search engines, and delisting will have zero effect on me.
I know I'm not the only one.
Google should pull the plug on News Corp right now.
Do it preemptively. Let Murdoch explain to his advertisers why impressions and click-throughs just dropped by 90% overnight. Then don't let him back.
The only people talking about how news should be something we pay for are those people who known they haven't actually been providing real news in a good long time. It's fluff, sensationalism and subtle political agendas designed around selling advertising. Nothing more.
REAL NEWS will be shared regardless of Murdoch's stonewall idiocy. Go ahead. Let Bing have the links. If it's newsworthy, we will share it. We will paraphrase and make it our own and Google can just pick up the links to our sites instead. We need to filter the garbage News Corp passes off as "news" most of the time anyway.
It concerns me that Microsoft and News Corp would essentially wall off part of the internet for the benefit of their corporations. This is a big change for the internet. Perhaps Mr. Murdoch went to China with Obama and got some lessons from the Chinese?
Hello,
I was disappointed in your reporting on Murdoch's proposed deal with Microsoft. Where is the reader in your analysis? This reader pays money for access to the WSJ. I have been very disappointment with the the quality of it since Rupert took over. Does Rupert care about readers? He sure doesn't show it. Trust is important for journalism. I am losing my trust in the WSJ. I do not need the over paid, clearly unqualified Rupert Murdoch to dictating which search engine I will use.
Sincerely,
John Kern
Murdoch is assuming that I am looking specifically for his content and for the most part I am just looking for a news story and considering how many News outlets their on the web, I seriously doubt I will miss WSJ or NYP from the resultset, especially since he is talking about putting it behind a Paywall.
The real question is how long will MS fund this gap for the lost traffic. Sooner or later, Murdoch and company would have to stand on their own and do it with significantly less visitors than with Google in the mix.
