FierceCIOFierceCIOTechWatchFierceMobileITFierceContentManagementFierceGovernmentIT   FierceVoIPFierceHealthITFierceFinanceIT

WSJ editor: Google is an Internet parasite

Robert Thomson, the editor of the Wall Street Journal has come forward and warned that companies that aggregate "mainstream media content" without paying are the "parasites or tech tapeworms in the intestines of the Internet." Without elaborating, he warned that these companies will soon "be challenged."

Thomson was scathing in his criticism that readers have been led to wrongly believe that content should be free, pointing out how aggregators like Google have profited from that mistaken perception. He noted, "Google argues they drive traffic to sites, but the whole Google sensibility is inimical to traditional brand loyalty."

On one hand, it is easy to dismiss traditional newspapers around the world as trumpeting an outdated business approach. However, the truth is that a typical journalist on a full-time salary has a quota of just 3-5 stories per week. This is due to the lengthy amount of time required to properly research and conduct interviews.

On the other hand, Google does not create an iota of content, yet it garners billions of dollars in advertising revenue that content providers can only dream of. When seen in this light, something is definitely wrong with this picture. Indeed, if all the newspapers are to fail, then the quality of news can only deteriorate. 

For more on this story:
- check out this article at The Australian

Related Articles:
Newspapers can survive as portals, content service providers
Google preparing to launch a new product next week

Ex-Google employees launch new search engine

SHARE WITH:
Email Twitter Facebook LinkedIn StumbleUpon
Get Your FREE FierceCIO:TechWatch Email Newsletter:
Comments (5) | Post a comment

Comments

In other words: "You damned kids get off my lawn!"

Does anyone else see this as them complaining because Google is making money off of content that they offer for free? If it is made freely available, what is to stop someone from making money off of it?

I think you clearly missed the point, or maybe didn't read the article.

They are complaining that Google is making Billions offering other people's content for free while those very content producers struggle. His point is that their only options will be to NOT make their content freely available, or to go out of business. (And NOT making it freely available is one way to ensure they DO go out of business).

So it's a lose-lose for the people who are actually producing the content - which means it will be a lose-lose for everyone if the content providers go dark or die out.

seriously? Is this really a story?

Sounds like the author is just disgruntled and scared. "Doesnt create one iota of content." Hmm...Like Directories....and actually google does provide quite a bit of useful SERVICES, as far as content they do not, to my knowledge use copyrighted material.

why should news deteriorate? Whats wrong with making money without creating content? They are providing very useful services. I fail to see how they are taking anything away from anyone. Have you ever used google news? Its great!! U can find news from many different sources, I generally choose the WSJ, NYT's and sources im familiar with. I am transfered then to their website where I am then seeing their advertising. News will not deteriorate or go away...it will keep up with technology. Many Newspapers will just give way to websites...what they will have a problem with is using other news sources as they are all on the same search...maybe now they will have to hire more reporters in order to have their OWN content as opposed to buying stories from reuters and AP, which is where most news stories come from now anyway...

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.