Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google Will Prioritize Stories for Paying News Subscribers (bloomberg.com)

Posted by msmash on from the up-next dept.

Google users who subscribe to newspapers will find articles from those publications appearing higher in their search results, part of the tech giant's efforts to help media companies find and retain paying readers, Bloomberg reports, citing people familiar with the matter. From the report: The Alphabet unit will also begin sharing search data that show who's most likely to buy a subscription, said the people, who asked to be anonymous because they weren't authorized to speak publicly. Google executives plan to disclose specific details at an event in New York on March 20, according to the people. Google declined to comment. The moves could help publishers better target potential digital subscribers and keep the ones they've already got by highlighting stories from the outlets they're paying for. The initiative marks the latest olive branch from Silicon Valley in its evolving relationship with media companies.

11 of 36 comments (clear)

  1. How does google know what I subscribe to? by QuietLagoon · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...Google users who subscribe to newspapers ...

    Do I have to tell google, or does google just sift through their data and surmise?

    1. Re:How does google know what I subscribe to? by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Do I have to tell google, or does google just sift through their data and surmise?

      Probably . . . neither.

      Google will probably expect the media companies to provide them with subscriber lists . . .

      . . . which Google will promptly resell.

      --
      Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    2. Re:How does google know what I subscribe to? by yuvcifjt · · Score: 2

      Pretty simple: using one of their countless javascript trackers, or through Chrome browser or Android.

      Google has countless trackers all over the web, from doubleclick, analytics, captcha, to ad services, and tag manager, etc. Google is a serial tracker.

      And if you know any amount of js, you'll realise how easy it is to fingerprint users using modern browsers, and the power a simple js script has over a page, including anything a user does from mouse movements, to keystrokes, etc.

      It's quite interesting that companies like Apple and Mozilla are fighting for your rights and privacy, and yet it is these companies that get abused most often.

    3. Re:How does google know what I subscribe to? by stephanruby · · Score: 4, Interesting

      . . . which Google will promptly resell.

      Google doesn't resell information. Reselling such information and you can only resell it once.

      However, selling targeted advertisements, you can do that an infinite amount of times.

      In other words, the original post should have said

      Google will probably expect the media companies to provide them with subscriber lists . . .

      . . . which Google will promptly use to sell more expensive ads (including ads purchased by the newspapers own competitors).

  2. I'm willing to pay by layabout · · Score: 3, Interesting

    but only once. I am not going to pay for multiple newspaper subscriptions. I want a netflix type subscription where I pay one party and I have access to all the news out there.

    1. Re:I'm willing to pay by alvinrod · · Score: 3, Informative

      It seems as though most of what's actually news comes via the Associated Press, so what you're asking for doesn't seem unreasonable. What you get from a magazine or paper just seems to be local stories or editorial content.

    2. Re:I'm willing to pay by originalGMC · · Score: 2

      It seems as though most of what's actually news comes via the Associated Press, so what you're asking for doesn't seem unreasonable. What you get from a magazine or paper just seems to be local stories or editorial content.

      Definitely a fan of the AP. Not a fan of news monetization past the point of paying for journalists. The capitalistic ethics of "fuck the world lets make this quarter the best quarter yet" just seem wrong to me when you're talking about information who's value is built upon trust. If you're going to make a boatload of money from the "news," how am I to trust you to tell me the truth rather than what I want to hear? I would be looking for fact-based non-editorial news. Something like the first 15 minutes of Democracy now but expanded past the 'war and peace report' ... like "today the brooklyn city council voted to kill all the homeless" - just the facts please. I will form my own opinion thank you very much.

  3. Betteridge's Law Of Google Questions by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

    Do I have to tell google

    Are you kidding? The answer is always "Yes google knows already".

    They knew you were subscribing before the paper did.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  4. Re:Doesn't matter. by XXongo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I canceled my last magazine and newspaper subscriptions 10 years ago, and I will never again, as long as I live, pay $1 for for any of it. Ever.

    That is, of course, why fake news is running rampant: people like you don't want to pay anything to reporters to get real news, and so what you get is what you pay for: worthless news.

  5. Drudge Report by sycodon · · Score: 2

    Drudge more or less does this already by virtue of including stories on his site.

    The Irony is that the Likes of Google bitch and moan about it all the time and some of the retards at the FEC want to regulate Drudge so badly they can taste it.

    --
    When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
  6. Re:I'll pay MORE to END bundling .. but enough? by Voyager529 · · Score: 2

    But seriously, you're undoing all the progress we've won

    Netflix has the lowest streaming selection it's had in a very long time. CBS pulled lots of their stuff because All Access, Disney is pulling their stuff next year, HBO has always marched to their own drum; Amazon, Hulu, and Youtube Red have their own exclusives as well. Even if a particular individual were willing to subscribe to all of these services, or a preferred subset, it's impossible to do an aggregate search and play a piece of content from whoever owns it. Moreover, while Netflix has a client on basically-everything, even for users willing to switch apps to switch shows, the availability of the different 'apps' for many smart TVs and streaming modules hinges entirely on firmware updates that are unlikely to actually come.

    Ultimately, paying per-publisher with an aggregating application that can access disparate paid sources is probably the best compromise that would work for both camps...but I'm not holding my breath for that sort of cooperation.