"...And finally, an Australian-American media mogul wishes to change the way we look at news stories on the web. If the News Corporation have their own way, it will cost you to look at Page 3 of The Sun Online, or to read Court Circular on The Times' own website..."
Could they [News Corporation] be slitting their own throats in doing this? So far, they have cemented their defiance to keeping the internet free by pulling their results off Google in the coming months. Google is at present the most popular search engine going, and this move would inconvenience the average Sun reader who wants to look at Page 3 or their fantasy football listings.
Paid for news provision goes against the original ethos of the internet envisaged by Sir Tim Berners-Lee. This could set a unhealthy precedent paving the way for corporate bodies to introduced paid for content. It is also a nightmare in terms of site accessibility and would have a negative impact on their organic search engine listings.
Will they be complaining if no one's reading their website? This could also be bad for advertisers, whose reach among people browsing the website would be diminished. Could the old yet dependable dead tree version be revived? One wonders.
SV, 13 November 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment