Is Murdoch Mad?

tw · 11-14-2007, 12:15 AM

From the NY Times of 14 Nov 2007:

Quote:

Murdoch Said to Stress Free Access to Wall St. Journal’s Web Site E-Mail
Rupert Murdoch says he plans to abolish subscription fees at The Wall Street Journal’s Web site, according to news accounts from Australia. This apparently was news to executives at his company and The Journal, who cautioned that the decision might not be final.

ZenGum · 11-14-2007, 08:52 AM

You don't go from one newspaper to a global empire by being mad.
Maybe he's thinking about advertising revenue. Maybe (more likely IMHO) he's thinking about being able to influence investors, nudge the market this way and that.
Maybe he's decided he has enough money and wants to start giving it all back, sharing it around. Probably not. :p

SteveDallas · 11-14-2007, 09:13 AM

Whether intended or not, it may also be a [not-so-]subtle wakeup call to the WSJ's existing management about who the boss is.

Clodfobble · 11-14-2007, 10:39 AM

Or maybe it has to do with this:

CBS News writers are planning to join the entertainment writers' strike

Their position changes drastically if no additional revenue is being made from the online publishing of their work. I suspect many more news sites will start turning free if the strike looks like it will continue to spread.

DanaC · 11-14-2007, 10:47 AM

No but he is evil :P

Undertoad · 11-14-2007, 02:14 PM

They are following the lead of Times Select.

tw · 11-14-2007, 02:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Undertoad

They are following the lead of Times Select.

A likely alternative. The WSJ has long had an RIAA attitude. Such as great paper was slowly about to be destroyed by ignoring technology.

Rexmons · 11-14-2007, 02:32 PM

he's mad alright. madly in love with his money, which explains his support for bush.

11-14-2007, 08:52 AM	#2
ZenGum Doctor Wtf Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Badelaide, Baustralia Posts: 12,861	You don't go from one newspaper to a global empire by being mad. Maybe he's thinking about advertising revenue. Maybe (more likely IMHO) he's thinking about being able to influence investors, nudge the market this way and that. Maybe he's decided he has enough money and wants to start giving it all back, sharing it around. Probably not. :p __________________ Shut up and hug. MoreThanPretty, Nov 5, 2008. Just because I'm nominally polite, does not make me a pussy. Sundae Girl.

11-14-2007, 02:32 PM	#8
Rexmons - Kavkaz United - Join Date: May 2007 Posts: 613	he's mad alright. madly in love with his money, which explains his support for bush. __________________ "Life's a bitch but God forbid the bitch divorce me..."

11-14-2007, 09:13 AM	#3
SteveDallas Your Bartender Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Philly Burbs, PA Posts: 7,651	Whether intended or not, it may also be a [not-so-]subtle wakeup call to the WSJ's existing management about who the boss is.

11-14-2007, 10:39 AM	#4
Clodfobble UNDER CONDITIONAL MITIGATION Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 20,012	Or maybe it has to do with this: CBS News writers are planning to join the entertainment writers' strike Their position changes drastically if no additional revenue is being made from the online publishing of their work. I suspect many more news sites will start turning free if the strike looks like it will continue to spread.

11-14-2007, 10:47 AM	#5
DanaC We have to go back, Kate! Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Yorkshire Posts: 25,964	No but he is evil :P

11-14-2007, 02:14 PM	#6
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	They are following the lead of Times Select.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)