I think Frank and Rob both make excellent points. Let Rupert find out what NOT having all those shares by readers of his crappy reporters feels like, those that drive readers to his online paywall blocked articles. I don't know why people do it, but I assume they do - read those "opinions" I mean. And if it isn't readers, it is the Programs/Papers themselves! Twitter is FILLED with self-promotion from the ugly Skynews and the birdcage bottom Australian. Maybe that says something: readers, if there are any left, aren't doing so much sharing after all.
And the issue of monopoly is true. If only that were the principle(d) reason for this government/Murdoch move. But it's not. I use a privacy protective search service, but sometimes the results aren't what I need so I occasionally change to Google as an option. People take the path of least resistance, though. They use what they are first exposed to because that's what they believe (learn) to be the right way. The sad (but brilliant on Google's part) equality that Google = Internet is the underlying problem. To unpick this at this stage will really upset the apple cart for many 'normal' online people. Hands up. How many have friends who can't/don't understand you when you ask them to open their browser? But if you say, open Google, they are right on it If there were a model that made search NOT require ad promotion to support it, that would be cool. Does it exist? I agree, just robo-block all the Murdoch sources. Then there is no copyright issue to deal with. No one would miss them. This is one of those very complicated problems with too many unintended consequences to list. The binary thinking of those making these decisions is frightening. (vaccine? what vaccine? when? who? you mean you can only supply 88,000? But but but!!!) Jan ----- Original Message ----- From: "Frank O'Connor" To: Cc:"link" Sent:Tue, 26 Jan 2021 05:24:59 +1100 Subject:Re: [LINK] If Google pulls search.... Mmmm … If it comes down to a choice between Google, and Rupert Murdoch’s right wing rags, ranting Fox News opinions and divisive demagoguery, Sky News and Sports, and News (in name only) Ltd journalism … I know which I’d pick. Murdoch would like a return to the pre-internet 'good old days’ … with trapped advertisers and readers … but that ain’t gonna happen and not have to change his business model. So his solution is to attack the Web …can anyone imagine the Web without hyperlinking? … or a search engine? … and feed off the Search Engines like a vampire. If I was Google I’d simply stop indexing News Ltd/Fox/Sky pages on the Web, prune any hyperlinks to News Ltd domains (here and overseas) and give them no coverage or linking capability in their search engines and apps at all. Reduce their ‘presence’ to that which News Ltd can provide on their sites … and see how Rupert likes it. After a year of that we’d know for sure who needs who. At the moment he’s acting like the soul destroying vampire he’s always been … feeding/sucking the life out of off government, third parties who deal with him, and now Google I’d like to see Rupert/News/Fox/Sky stand on their own two feet and see how they can do without a full service Internet. Just my 2 cents worth … ---- On 25 Jan 2021, at 8:57 pm, [email protected] [1] wrote: I'm so tired of ill-informed people in power screwing with stuff they don't understand to satisfy Rupert Murdoch, and lately, Peter Costello. Links: ------ [1] mailto:[email protected] _______________________________________________ Link mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
