I'm trying to figure out how you could have lunch without knowing it. Could that be a symptom of techno-nerd Asperger's syndrome? More important, could that be an explanation for the five pounds I've gained?
This has a ton of flaws in it. First, it doesnt account at all for overlap. I read the Times everyday, because I like. Do I sometimes click a link on a blog or google something that directs me to the Times website, yes, but those page views would have happened without assistance. Also, you've got websites where you can esentially read a Times story without ever actually going to their website. Have you heard of Gawker.com? You can go, read the gist of the article, and never bother to click through to the Times, never affecting their page views and having their writers work for free. I guess the Times could reference Gossip Girl in more of their news stories, but, it might be a good idea to have a few people out there still actually reporting.
dont WSJ, CNN, and NYT all pay the AP for its content? I don't think they're the ones the AP is complaining about. In fact, I bet any offsite links those 3 do have, they actually have business agreements with whoever they link to.
Why even bother trying to lump them in with Google News which just links whatever it feels like?
@GilroyBrizo: Actually, Dow Jones, the publisher of the WSJ, already runs a rival newswire, and CNN is planning one of its own that it's pitching directly to the AP's newspaper customers. In any event, can you explain to me what a licensing agreement to run complete articles has to do with the right anyone has under the fair-use doctrine to quote from news stories?
Simply quoting Google and Techmeme execs saying that this is bullshit does not "debunk" the AP's stance, as the title of this piece claims. Google and Techmeme aggregate news, so they are directly threatened by this.
Looking to representatives of those two companies for the final word on this subject is like looking to Halliburton for the final word on whether the Iraq war is justified.
But the chart supports the newspapers' central complaint: Papers' sites would still get traffic without search engines. But those search engines' news sites wouldn't get any traffic without the papers. Yet that dependency is not reflected in revenues.
@UmaGaleo: You live in a fascinating world where newspapers are the only media and newspaper-employed journalists are the only people capable of reporting. Is it pretty there?
09/29/09
04/13/09
They say that after 50 you get the face that you deserve. I say that on Gawker you (might) get the name that you deserve. (Rush Limp-paw, anyone?)
04/13/09
04/09/09
04/09/09
Why even bother trying to lump them in with Google News which just links whatever it feels like?
04/09/09
04/08/09
Looking to representatives of those two companies for the final word on this subject is like looking to Halliburton for the final word on whether the Iraq war is justified.
04/08/09
04/08/09
04/09/09
04/07/09
Tapper: Keeper.
02/20/09
02/20/09
02/20/09