Slashdot Mirror
Murdoch Says, "We'll Charge For All Our Sites"
Oracle Goddess writes "In what appears to be a carefully planned suicide, Rupert Murdoch announced that his media giant News Corporation Ltd intends to charge for all its news websites in a bid to lift revenues, as the transition towards online media permanently changes the advertising landscape. 'The digital revolution has opened many new and inexpensive methods of distribution, but it has not made content free. Accordingly we intend to charge for all our news websites,' Murdoch said."
Consider the ~30% of the population who honestly thinks George W. Bush was a great president. It's not too much of a stretch to imagine that some of them might be willing to pay a monthly fee to get access to foxnews.com, if the alternatives are left-leaning sites like msnbc.com or blogs they've never heard of.
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
WOOOO YEAH BOY never happy and proud of it!1 "Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING." Wow, gee, that's totally not want I wanted to convey.
So what shade of grey was Michael Jackson, before decomposition set in and he started turning green?
The absolute worst thing anybody can do is dehumanize their opposition by calling them sheep and then put them all in ovens.
Yeah, I agree.
But, BHO is more of an Russian type Socialist than an German type Socialist.
Tim S.
Please, please please make Fox news website pay per view... ps please also keep Glenn Beck safely locked inside.
"It's not sports" is to "it's sports entertainment" as "It's not journalism" is to "it's journalistic entertainment"
Hey, just because you voted republican doesn't mean you can expect a black man to come over and sort out your mess for free!
IranAir Flight 655 never forget!
Good evening to our beloved Republican moderators.
Doesn't matter anymore... the idiocracy Rupert invaded nations to create, has been created.
In the US anyways, the lower-end of the Fox News demographic ("birthers") gets all their news now from chain emails. The upper end wouldn't mind paying $400 for a glass of scotch, but I think they'll view the non-free websites as some kind of tax or something, and revolt.
What Mr Rupert seems to be totally MISSING which is the point I am making is that should he put the SAME content on the internet that he puts into the printed version, I am STILL NOT INTERESTED in paying for it. Possibly less so.
Actually, the point that most of us seem to be missing is that the people who seek out Fox "News" do so for a reason. It affirms their own beliefs, and gives them warm fuzzies. I'm pretty sure there will be a large number of people willing to pay for that affirmation, especially at a time when they feel they are the victims of a Democrat president and Democrat Congress.
The question is whether the subscribers he loses because they don't have the extra cash lying around will be offset by the number of rich bastard subscribers. I would bet Fox "News" has more than its share of both.
Fox news reports that this case of reverse discrimination is an affront to janitorial principles.