"For months (years?) Rupert Murdoch has been waving his jowls around and shouting that Google is stealing from him by not paying to index his material. And all along, we´ve been saying, "Pffft, right. If you don´t like it, just add a robots.txt file that tells Google not to index you. Until you do, stop whining and put it back in your pants."
Now Rupert has promised to do exactly that. He claims that he´s going to take all of News Corp´s websites pay-only and have them removed from Google when he does.
You know what? He´s lying. But I think it´d be entertaining if every reporter who interviewed him, for the rest of his life, said, "Hey, Rupert, when are you going to take all your company´s websites out of Google?" It´d also be hilarious to get the CEOs of the various pieces of Rupert´s empire to comment on whether they want all their company´s materials invisible to search engines."
I believe that Fox News actually has some stuff in their robots.txt file that is actually there to make it easier for Google to index the site.
Rupert is running a very big bluff in the hope that he can have a piece of the Google pie. I suspect that sooner or later someone is going to call him on it and then things will get fun. I don´t understand this hatred of sites that drive traffic to his sites. I tell you, when I write a summary I want as many people linking to it as possible!
I was trawling (not to be confused with trolling) for news on another of Murdoch´s sites, news.com.au, and what should I see at the bottom of a story: "Make your own news service on iGoogle in 30 seconds. Choose from news.com.au´s news, entertainment, business, travel, or technology stories"
if the likes of murdoch had there way (and not just murdoch but all corporate entities) ALL information would be at a cost... whereas the internet by its very nature is the liberation of information, by moving it as fast as our lines can transmit and receive.
ALL proprietary/copyrighted information holders will ultimately be against the internet for that reason.