Murdoch may block Google searches - Page 2

Stuart · 11-11-2009, 08:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Plus they all have adverts, are they going to pay google for each person they direct to their sites? Funny Rupert doesn't mention that, they need each other much like the crocodile and the plover bird and guess which organisation is represented by the slimy reptile.

RM has said elsewhere that in current economic conditions, the income from advertising does not meet the costs of the service.

Horace · 11-11-2009, 10:16

The more you tighten your grip Murdoch, the more readers will slip through your fingers.

Flyboy · 11-11-2009, 11:10

Ah well...once Rupert has his favourite puppet in Number Ten, he can write his own laws.

**Hugh** · 11-11-2009, 11:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyboy

Ah well...once Rupert has his favourite puppet in Number Ten, he can write his own laws.

Ahem......
From the Independent

Quote:

IN JULY 1995, Tony Blair flew halfway round the world to cement his relationship with Rupert Murdoch at a News Corporation conference. Introducing him, the media tycoon joked: "If the British press is to be believed, today is all part of a Blair-Murdoch flirtation. If that flirtation is ever consummated, Tony, I suspect we will end up making love like two porcupines - very carefully."
For Mr Blair, the relationship bore fruit when he was elected with the key support of the Sun. But Mr Murdoch had to wait until yesterday for full satisfaction when No 10 launched a passionate attack on his critics after the Lords passed an anti-Murdoch amendment to the Competition Bill.

And let's not forget the "Murdoch Clause", as highlighted in the Guardian

Quote:

Freedom of information files released to the Guardian reveal how the media tycoon Rupert Murdoch wields extensive lobbying clout over the Blair government.

Mr Murdoch secured private reassurances from ministers during heavy lobbying that he would be able to buy Channel Five if he wanted to, according to partly censored documents released by the culture secretary, Tessa Jowell.
In previously undisclosed meetings, representatives of the Murdoch empire were able to lobby ministers six times in a crucial five-month period when an important bill was passing through parliament. Citizens' groups have said they were unable to get similar face-to-face access to ministers.

Flyboy · 11-11-2009, 12:13

Didn't happen though, did it? So, Blair wasn't as compliant as people were trying to make out. Can't see Cameron being so reticent.

handyman · 11-11-2009, 12:54

Can't Murdock just use spider.txt to block search engine spiders from certain parts of his sites? This is not a new thing to be able to do in fact it's a basic part of running any website.

He'd be well hacked off though if Google did not index his site at all. I run a small site and we would lose over Â£50,000 revenue PA if Google did not list us.

**Hugh** · 11-11-2009, 13:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyboy

Didn't happen though, did it? So, Blair wasn't as compliant as people were trying to make out. Can't see Cameron being so reticent.

Only because the Government was made, by the Lords, to make some last-minute amendments to the Bill - link (under much protest).

And as Alastair Campbell (Blair's spin-meister) deputy stated

Quote:

Lance Price, Mr Campbell's deputy, called Mr Murdoch "the 24th member of the [Blair] Cabinet". He added: "His presence was always felt. No big decision could ever be made inside No10 without taking account of the likely reaction of three men, Gordon Brown, John Prescott and Rupert Murdoch. On all the really big decisions, anybody else could safely be ignored."

Must be a new definition of reticent I hadn't come across before.

11-11-2009, 16:05

Can't stand murdoch and personally i am in favour of anything that means less people read any of the content spewed out from his rags so come on rupert don't let it just be words put it into action soon as. Whatever government gets in will court this slimeball as right now like it or not he is able to influence so red, blue or yellow they will all be trying to be his friend if they win no difference between any of them on that score.

rogerdraig · 11-11-2009, 17:55

i think if he goes ahead with this and the charging for his papers and sky news content we may see the start of a new era with out big business running the news

as i think people are now too aware of how to access news and information with out any of the main news providers

one of the commentators one of the news stations got on to discuss the air crash where the captain landed safely on the river said the he thought the biggest story that day was the panic that ensued at the various news networks of how to put up news that was new and not already known by most because of twitter txting and alike had already informed most people the presenter tried to go to a different subject but the other people they had there were agreeing too lol

i think any news organisation who makes it hard to access it will loose people quickly

so i hope they go ahead lol

TheDaddy · 12-11-2009, 05:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by foreverwar

Ahem......
From the Independent

Also from The Independent

David Cameron has been accused of making a "contract" with Britain's biggest media company to trade political support before an election for government favours afterwards if the Tories win.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...h-1819010.html

**Hugh** · 12-11-2009, 07:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Also from The Independent

David Cameron has been accused of making a "contract" with Britain's biggest media company to trade political support before an election for government favours afterwards if the Tories win.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk...h-1819010.html

You're right - but I was replying to the point that only the Tories were part of this type of thing.

**Maggy** · 12-11-2009, 09:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by punky

Worth pointing out that The Guardian said this first but doesn't quite back up everyone's pre-conceived notions that well.

You bet I have pre-conceived notions about the Murdoch empire.Be under no illusions that the power that this company/family has will be used for the benefit of the UK citizens, no matter how much the media owned by this family touts itself as defending the good and honest British people from immigrants,terrorists,poor Labour government(despite being so keen at the start),PC'ness and every other rubbish they can dredge up that divides and polarises our society.

I'd rather see the power of our media shared around a little more so that no one has the ability to dictate favourable terms, to get rich quicker and to make political policy without ever standing for government.

broadbandking · 12-11-2009, 09:48

Another way to make money, don't people pay for a internet service to be able use websites freely

**Hugh** · 12-11-2009, 20:45

No - they pay for an internet service to be able to access the internet.

broadbandking · 13-11-2009, 09:19

So people pay for a internet service so they can access the web but I can't freely use a website that I choose, I understand some you have to sign up and pay for certain contents, but news should be freely not charged for, BBC news is free so I use them in future, just away of getting money.