Comments on: Microsoft, Don’t You Dare

By: Eric

Eric — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 18:13:12 +0000

Personally I think Murdoch’s move is genius. Google has piggy-backed off of everyone else’s content for long enough.

Why should they get to do anything with the content for free, including index it? They don’t own it and they didn’t pay to create it…the media companies did.

But only a large content producer, with a lot of frickin’ content (eg News Corp) could pull this off.

If it works, who’s next? Would Google care if NY Times pulled out? AP? BBC? Or any of the other big producers?

Maybe because of Google’s stinginess they will end up as an independent blog search engine only.

By: All the News That’s Fit to Bing « DigiDave – Journalism is a Process, Not a Product

Tue, 01 Dec 2009 03:15:42 +0000

[...] Microsoft, Don’t You Dare From myself, and the rest of the internet community: Microsoft, you must not do this. Doing so would set a precedent that content should charge search engines for the right to be spidered. What you are doing is just that, attempting to buy exclusive rights to News Corp online. This is the proverbial slippery slope. [...]

By: Sash

Sash — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:48:56 +0000

you must believe the internet is very fragile if you think that one company, even one as large as MS, can destroy it

By: Bram

Bram — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 11:29:29 +0000

If we ne to use three or more search engines to find what we are looking for then everybody will be heading back to the meta-search engines like dogpile.com (don’t even know if it still exists).

By: Lenart Rudel

Lenart Rudel — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 07:33:28 +0000

I suggest you see this video by Tim O’Reilly about how he thinks the web should look like. He’s saying (and I agree) that browser wars, search engine wars (and others) should stop because nothing good will ever come out of this! Everyone is trying to get rid of their competition but instead of doing so by providing better, more useful and fascinating services they’re trying to win this battle by focusing on destroying the rivals using “below the belt” punches where users are usually the one that suffer most. Users should be something Microsoft, Google and others should care about most and this doesn’t necessarily mean you cannot make money with their services!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYRC8nfZ67M&feature=PlayList&p=A0D433518BDA7856&index=2

I believe people are angry on Microsoft because of the impact such decision would have on user’s experience of the web. It would really be a step back if they did so. Many of us would feel like in 1990′s where the information you were looking for was much harder to find. What’s the point of having to manually search for “the right content” again? Having to use 3 (or more) search engines to find articles with different points of view?

By: John

John — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 06:04:17 +0000

Does anyone honestly think this is going to do anything other than reduce the relevance of News properties online? I think there is less than zero chance Google will give News a single cent to index their site. The disingenuousness of News not setting a robots to no-follow pretty much sums it all up. If they really cared, they’d have long since opted out of indexes.

The horse really has bolted on this one, media organizations really do need to realize there is a different landscape, and they can’t just try to go back to old business models.

By: Andre Sanders

Andre Sanders — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 02:49:03 +0000

Excellent write up. And I agree… Microsoft, don’t you dare! What a sad excuse for trying to justify Rupert Murdoch’s position and then to try to create some sort of competitive advantage with it. Let content be free!

By: Twinkle Toes

Twinkle Toes — Tue, 24 Nov 2009 01:23:51 +0000

Everyone just loves to hate MS.
Would you be on the barricades defending an ‘open web’, when Google was the one willing to pay for sole access to News Corp?

The reality is that the web is not open.
Twitter was a walled site.
And you all want ape when MS and Google started integrating tweets into their search results. You f-ing loved it.

Rupy was pissed when he saw this happening.
He thought: “These MS and Google idiots pay millions just to access some f-ing tweets?”

And then a plan hatched inside his wrinkly old head.
He said: “F them! Let’s see how much they are willing to pay for ‘real’ news, when it is no longer available for free”!

And now the courting of News Corp has started.
Rupy will not sign any exclusive deals.
He’s old and wrinkly, not stupid!

He will pimp his news organization to every search engine and they will gladly pay.

I am off to practice my ‘game theory’ on my PSP :D

Peace out!

By: Microsoft once more proves you can indeed buy stupidity

Microsoft once more proves you can indeed buy stupidity — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 22:51:18 +0000

[...] of the biggest dangers that this move by Microsoft could create, as Alex Wilhelm at The Next Web notes, a dangerous precedent that we could never go back from. Doing so would set a precedent that [...]

By: Lenart Rudel

Lenart Rudel — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 20:15:19 +0000

I just read this article today. They did a survey in Germany that showed that only 5% of the top 10 search results are from news sites. Wikipedia on the other hand “owns” 13% of the top-ten results. So would removing news from search engines really hurt Google? I don’t think so, but it would sure damage Google’s image :) http://bit.ly/4SRnbH