Oh no, not (s)Zell!
Posted on 04/07/2007 6:30:35 PM PDT by DeaconBenjamin2
It's time for newspapers to stop giving away their stories to popular search engines such as Google, according to Samuel Zell, the real estate magnate whose bid for Tribune Co. was accepted this week.
In conversations before and after a speech Zell delivered Thursday night at Stanford Law School in Palo Alto, Calif., the billionaire said newspapers could not economically sustain the practice of allowing their articles, photos and other content to be used free by other Internet news aggregators.
"If all of the newspapers in America did not allow Google to steal their content, how profitable would Google be?" Zell said during the question period after his speech. "Not very."
Newspapers have allowed Google to use their articles in exchange for a small cut of advertising revenue, but search engines also help to distribute their content to wider online audiences. Google and Yahoo have financial arrangements with wire services, such as the Associated Press, to provide news stories and photos. Yesterday, Google settled a copyright-infringement lawsuit with Agence France-Presse, which had alleged that Google posted news summaries, headlines and photos without permission.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I've read more of their stuff, not to mention the Seattle Slimes and Seattle P-U (neither to which I will subscribe despite the demise of the "King County Journal"; the county apparently originally named for a slave-owning gay, but in the process of changing over to a celebrated philandering minister to whom whose prime audience pays no attention at all to his message).
Killing online replication only means "I'm not going there." Requiring excerpting likely means "I'm probably not going there" given how media sites lard themselves up with trash that takes forever to load, even if you have a *fairly* speedy connection (I exclude all dial-up here, having only recently let go of same for slightly faster DSL).
If they don't want me reading their stuff... go ahead and ban it. Be assured I won't be reading it.
And be ready, editors, to explain your low hit count to your advertisers.
To late!! I refuse to buy your propaganda sheet Zell!!!!!!
LOL! I thought it had something to do with those two also.
Oh no, not (s)Zell!
Let's everybody go back to the 20th century!
fewer and fewer, sadly.
the los angeles skool system is ... um ...
bad.
the skool leftists have created a new slave class of kids that cannot do math or read.
I think you're confusing your desire for free news with what newspapers need to do to stay profitable. Online editions contribute 2-3% of current newspaper revenues, despite having massive circulations beyond the paper edition. To put bluntly, your eyeballs are worth less than 2% those of a paid subscriber. I doubt they'll miss you when you're gone.
The truth is...that newspapers will survive and live on. But the idea of major papers in LA, Chicago or St. Louis being major papers read by segments of society outside of their local area will come come to an end.
The internet readily beats newspapers on “real” news. So the papers are going to have to concentrate on local events and politics, which the internet and TV networks have yet to show alot of interest in. The day will come when you go to pick up the Nashville Banner on a Tuesday, and it will be 12 pages maximum.
I don’t see this as a bad thing. If they would concentrate on their local town and area...they might generate a bit more interest in local affairs and draw back some sour readers from the past.
cluetrain
A powerful global conversation has begun. Through the Internet, people are discovering and inventing new ways to share relevant knowledge with blinding speed. As a direct result, markets are getting smarter—and getting smarter faster than most companies....
Chaos 2.0
...Now marketers and customers can have their transactions and conversations directly. That is to say, we the customers can get the information we want about products straight from sellers and the more that happens, the less those sellers need to waste money on giving us messages we did not ask for and do not want (aka, advertising). The more that happens, the less money they will spend on ads. Total ad spending will, indeed, decline.
That horrible crashing sound you hear is a gravy train derailing. ...
Ihope the bustard goes bust. this is probably good news that way the trib company will have less hits.
It sounds to me like the Tribune Company is going to accelerate its decline under this guy.
He owns part of the White Sox....so he has to do something....
” But, regarding that last part, with my idea, the reporters would be working for themselves. “
Yes, but won’t they still have that same liberal slant? Won’t they still be trying to change the world and “raise awareness”?
I salute your efforts at changing the paradigm (I am happily ignorant of the inner workings of the news business) and I hope that your model takes hold.
Joila! The Politic!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.