Evil + Evil = Fail

[Donkey]

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/11/news-corp-microsoft-seek-to-pressure-google-into-paying-for-news/

I mean what? Seriously they can't actually think that this will work? Is Murdoch getting senile? I mean, I'll celebrate anything that makes FOX less accessible, and I understand that news corps are looking for new ways to make profit, as the internets cuts into their money making capabilities, but this one really leaves me scratching my head.


On a somewhat related note, one thing I've been wondering lately is how Microsoft can be so evil and the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation can be so great.

[Michael]

http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2009/11/news-corp-microsoft-seek-to-pressure-google-into-paying-for-news/

I mean what? Seriously they can't actually think that this will work? Is Murdoch getting senile? I mean, I'll celebrate anything that makes FOX less accessible, and I understand that news corps are looking for new ways to make profit, as the internets cuts into their money making capabilities, but this one really leaves me scratching my head.

The dying days of every industry puts forward all kinds of bizarre attempts to stave off the inevitable.

Just another example of the continuing fall in the average rate of return on capital.

When that rate hits zero, capitalism will be dead. In the first world, that rate iis in the mid-single digits.

On a somewhat related note, one thing I've been wondering lately is how Microsoft can be so evil and the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation can be so great.
History is replete with examples of murderous monsters turning around and building splendid examples of architectural beauty. The Taj Mahal is a famous example of a such a building built by a particularly murderous monster.

[Daktoria]

Been seeing a lot of critical articles on this, and none of them provide evidence implying that News Corp is going to lose its share of the news market; ironic that their restriction of access will force people to use intuition more and evidence less in their arguments and opinions if this becomes the growing trend across the industry. Perhaps free and independent sources will become more prevalent, but nonprofit bearing sources can only support themselves for so long, and it's only a matter of time before they can no longer afford their operational fundamentals short of charismatically coercing fundamental providers to keep on providing.

[Americano]

I have to laugh when I read Murdoch's scheme. Go to any Google news source; after the lead source or three it lists from 100-500 additional sources with the same content.

[Michael]

Been seeing a lot of critical articles on this, and none of them provide evidence implying that News Corp is going to lose its share of the news market; ironic that their restriction of access will force people to use intuition more and evidence less in their arguments and opinions if this becomes the growing trend across the industry. Perhaps free and independent sources will become more prevalent, but nonprofit bearing sources can only support themselves for so long, and it's only a matter of time before they can no longer afford their operational fundamentals short of charismatically coercing fundamental providers to keep on providing.

I'm not buying this. Murdoch newspapers are almost content free already after you remove the wire-service stories from it.

Fact is, this is a war for advertising dollars, not a 'news article' war.

Most educated Americans that I know of have become accustomed to non-US media for their news. That says everything you need to know about the quality of US media. It isn't something that needs to be saved.

It is a pleasure for me to watch 21st century news-media companies fail in the marketplace. There is no loss to society here.

[Americano]

I'm not buying this. Murdoch newspapers are almost content free already after you remove the wire-service stories from it.

Fact is, this is a war for advertising dollars, not a 'news article' war.

Most educated Americans that I know of have become accustomed to non-US media for their news. That says everything you need to know about the quality of US media. It isn't something that needs to be saved.

It is a pleasure for me to watch 21st century news-media companies fail in the marketplace. There is no loss to society here.

Buggy whips.

[Daktoria]

Most educated Americans that I know of have become accustomed to non-US media for their news. That says everything you need to know about the quality of US media. It isn't something that needs to be saved.

Sample selection bias and external validity aside in who you know and your definition of "educated", domestic news media has a stronger influence on popular opinion than foreign news media, and News Corp is a leading (if not the leading) domestic news media provider as well as a leading media provider in general.

[Michael]

Buggy whips.
Exactly. I see no need to preserve buggy whip manufacturers. I think that game is silly, stupid and wasteful.

Sample selection bias and external validity aside in who you know and your definition of "educated", domestic news media has a stronger influence on popular opinion than foreign news media, and News Corp is a leading (if not the leading) domestic news media provider as well as a leading media provider in general.
And that's why educated American's seek out non-US news sources.

Where Newscorp goes, only shell companies remain.

I will shed no tears for the market death of US news media corporations. They serve no purpose save their own. There is no loss if they are gone.

The old propaganda about "newspapers being the guardians of liberty" is a joke. They are the leading cheerleaders/enablers for fascism and always have been.

[Daktoria]

That's the point though. The only ones believing News Corp is going to perish from this are those who are already opposed to it. There isn't any evidence showing that the current or future markets won't accommodate News Corp's increased demand for higher prices on news, and if people are willing to accommodate it, then the exclusive availability of News Corp's information will impact the political scene.

As the adage goes, past performance doesn't guarantee future results. That's what arbitrage opportunities are all about - contrarian innovation which exploits the failings of historical trends that sheep follow. Even if historical trends indicate reckless risktaking here, that doesn't mean News Corp isn't going to succeed especially since historical trends are always up to interpretation.

[Americano]

Sample selection bias and external validity aside in who you know and your definition of "educated", domestic news media has a stronger influence on popular opinion than foreign news media, and News Corp is a leading (if not the leading) domestic news media provider as well as a leading media provider in general.

That certainly emphasizes the gullibility and ignorance of popular opinion. This is the same nation that media led to believe Iraq poised a military threat to the US while media sources outside the US/UK were screaming foul. From there we can move on to the economic collapse where that same media remained in denial until Morgan Stanley collapsed.

Media is a business plan dependent on consumer advertising for revenue and bad news doesn't drive consumer spending in a US economy 72% dependent on those consumers. Each day US media is filled with crap such as 'the US housing industry gained .005% over the same period last year', reported by the special interest group US Association of Realtors without mentioning that year ago period was the worst in 50-years. Bad news is not allowed unless it serves purposes of political partisanship.

[Michael]

That's the point though. The only ones believing News Corp is going to perish from this are those who are already opposed to it. There isn't any evidence showing that the current or future markets won't accommodate News Corp's increased demand for higher prices on news, and if people are willing to accommodate it, then the exclusive availability of News Corp's information will impact the political scene.

As the adage goes, past performance doesn't guarantee future results. That's what arbitrage opportunities are all about - contrarian innovation which exploits the failings of historical trends that sheep follow. Even if historical trends indicate reckless risktaking here, that doesn't mean News Corp isn't going to succeed especially since historical trends are always up to interpretation.

Put your money where your mouth is and invest in Newscorp. Go ahead. When you make a million in profit, you can laugh at me.

In the meantime, I will enjoy the pleasure of watching Newscorp floundering around trying to save itself. How about that $billion that Rupert paid to buy MySpace eh?

Old Rupert has lost his lucky touch. Now he needs brains to run the show and I don't see any around Newscorp - its all downhill for them now. :shrug:

(and the reason there are no brightlights at Newscorp is because Rupert has chased away anyone who had a brain - lots of evidence of that trend around - now there is no one but those named Murdoch to run the show).