Murdoch On Blocking Search Engines: “I Think We Will”

News Corp. CEO doesn't think much of "search people"

Get the WebProNews Newsletter:

[ Search]

There’s a chance that the content produced by the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, and a number of other important organizations will soon become impossible to find using Google.  Rupert Murdoch indicated in a recent interview that News Corp. may block search engines.

News Corp. is the world’s second largest media group.  It owns enough stuff that even hitting the highlights would take far too much time.  (Wikipedia has an 861-word entry titled "List of assets owned by News Corporation" if you’re feeling adventurous.)

Murdoch’s interview with Sky News editor David Speers could be of huge significance, then.  In it (the relevant part of the conversation starts around the 3:10 mark), Murdoch said, "We’d rather have fewer people coming to our website, but paying."  In reference to "search people," he next added, "They don’t suddenly become loyal readers of our content."

Finally, in response to a question regarding why News Corp. doesn’t just block search engines, Murdoch said, "Well, I think we will . . ."

But here’s the tricky part: Murdoch cited the Wall Street Journal’s current approach to pay walls and subscriptions as an example of what he’d like to implement on a larger scale, and it’s actually possible to access WSJ stories using Google.  It’s only when clicking around within the WSJ that you run into truncated articles.

So we – and a lot of industry decision-makers – will see what happens.  Whichever way Murdoch leans, he definitely has the power to start a trend.

UPDATE: Danny Sullivan has pointed out a sort of middle ground at which Murdoch might arrive: "Publishers can have Google News index the entire text of their articles but NOT show the full story to visitors who come from Google (for Google’s web search, that’s not an option – but you can provide summary pages).  They can also, if they choose, have only a small summary of their content indexed."

That would allow News Corp.’s properties to by and large stick to the WSJ model without sacrificing loads of search traffic and becoming less visible to potential ad-clickers and paying customers.  A smart compromise, perhaps.

As for when a change might go through, Jon Miller, News Corp.’s Chief Digital Officer, gave a rough deadline by talking about "months and quarters – not weeks" at a conference yesterday.  But according to Emma Barnett, he also indicated that News Corp. wouldn’t do anything drastic on its own, which may either be a polite way of contradicting Murdoch’s statements or a hint that the industry really is about to change. 

Related Articles:

MySpace To Miss $100 Million From Google Search Deal

> Murdoch Says Newspapers Must Charge For Online Content

> News Corp. Posts Disappointing Financial Results

Murdoch On Blocking Search Engines: “I Think We Will”
Top Rated White Papers and Resources
  • Guest

    Iran Mullahs and Murdock what they have in comment they both are hypocrites. They both like the communists in reality. They’re both far right wing.

  • Tom Rogers

    Well, well, well….That sleazy little squid that is Rupert Murdoch plans to make the junk opinion crap from his ‘news’ organizations less available to the general public! Great move for a ‘news’ and ‘information’ corp! This is another admission that ‘News Corp’ is nothing more than a soap box for fruit-loops and wing-nuts to vomit their xenophobic rubbish.By making it less available for critics to quote and laugh about in what we think of as a society that promotes the free exchange of information and ideas double underlines the real nature of the product produced by Fox, et al: Closed Minded B.S. from a Closed Shop; a true Fortress of Misinformation! But then, what can you expect from a descendant of 18th century London backstreet cut-throats and street hookers! Hey, Rupert! Your inferiority complex is showing! I’ll just keep watching Jon Stewart for the lowdown each day’s Fox misadventures is word land!

  • Guest

    Unfortunately, the propaganda Murdoch and his political deceitful friends with their dirty hands in our government’s pocket spread is eaten by the uneducated, close-minded, lazy group of people who never bother checking facts. Murdoch’s disappearance from Google is a blessing. I hope he goes away and never comes back. Those who seek the truth will find their information through many other mediums. Will I be willing to pay for news if others follow suit? Yes, I will pay for news with content and integrity. Will I be willing to pay for the junk Murdoch provides? Absolutely never. So, good riddance Murdock. You will not be missed.

  • NichtOliver

    I first scoffed at him when he said, “They shouldn’t [have gotten it for free”. A contemptuous grin leaked across my face, and I thought, “You old man, you don’t know how the internet works do you? It’s the world of open-source, free stuff!”

    But, as he explained it, it made sense. Actual news agencies that bother to research stories, hire staff, and publish do all the dirty work, and sites like Google News simply leach stories from legitimate news sources. It costs News Corp, GE, and other news corporations money to print stories. These free sites just parasite off of legit news agencies, and will cause them to loose money and die off. Then who will deliver news? Blogs and other internet sources generally don’t do any original research. They simply comment on news collected by traditional sources.

    While I’m not the biggest fan of Murdoch’s empire, he has a legit point.

  • Guest

    Rupert needs to retire if he wants his company to grow. Does he actually believe newscorp is the only way people will get news in the future?

  • http://www.independentcomputerconsultant.com computer consultant

    Lets see how much his traffic will drop if he block google etc.

    • http://www.mouse-mat.com mat

      probably by about 90%

      who in reality turns the computer on and goes to a specific ‘news’ site in the hope it


      have something relevent to your concern/question? i doubt there are many.

  • http://www.Bonsai-mart.com Guest

    I say let them start a trend of privatizing search on websites. People will get used to it and know to not go there and get much. In the mean time they can come to my website www.Bonsai-mart.com and look around at everything for free forever. Some and I say some of them will spend some money with me. And I will take it in exchange for the goods and services we provide. Simply!

    They will just be helping me out for doing it.

  • http://www.sacred-guardians.com/ Hilda

    Greed. He doesn’t feel he has enough money yet.. if it was up to him he would charge everyone who uses the computer and pushes the button to turn it on.. Anway, who reads his news? I dont.. as cited before he has a one sided news. I like to see objective news from both sides, not just from a nerrow point of propaganda view. And he wants people pay for it? I think he is out of touch. His money corrupted him.

    • http://www.mouse-mat.com mat

      Money always corrupts

  • Guest

    Well I guess it takes an Aussie to show the almighty Google what it is, an empty shell without the work, efforts and content contributed by others whose content Google uses… The fact is that Google will one day go the way of Altavist and the Doe-Doe Bird as I personally believe that it has “Gotten Evil and Greedy”, they call it tweaking their searches, but in reality there screwing them around to drive more to there own paid AdWords…!!!

    Personally I like Fox, it’s fare and balanced with some wonderful American Patriots working both in front and behind camera’s. They simply report the facts and it’s up to us the decide on the facts presented to us, the true price of freedom is eternal vigilance and history will always be the Judge..

  • goofy

    He may be rich but I for one, can’t be accused of making him richer! I never buy the news! It’s so full of rubbish about a select group of his friends that who cares what he thinks…….that’s why I love the web….finally you can find out what you want to know, when you want to know and you can also go to the supposed enemy’ site and find out what’s really happening in this world of ours……

    Keep on your rose coloured glasses mate because the world at large is leaving you behind Murdoch!

  • mt. barrow

    mr murdoch,along with his sidekicks does not like people seeing the truth,i always buy 4 newspapers every day and through bits printed in each one you may find a hint of truth,murdoch only likes to put into print what he thinks is good for his controling of your thought pattern may be if he spent longer out of bed with his other powerful friends he might even publish something good and honest,if your looking for sleeze,just look into his society i have and if burdoch told me the sky was blue i would have to go outside and check. quite frankly,i dont waste my money on his papers so blocking search engines so we cant read his crap without paying is agood thing and whilst he is about it please put the price of your papers up, to the point where decent working people can not afford them,saving them from their brains being fried. up yours

  • Guest

    The idiots in this board are fighting each other calling liberals and conservatives.

    But people are looking to hear and see actual news of any value rather than girls with big boobs.

    I watched Al-Jazeera English, BBC news and Foreign News media like Russia Today, France 41 etc.

    What a difference in quality of news.

    Compared to foreign news channels American news media is anchored by idiots,just pumping out total propaganda news,Bullies like Bill O Riley who shout at guests.

    What is the American news media is doing?

    Its like a bunch of clowns in circus.

    People in America should watch foreign channels to understand what News actually means.

    Choose any foreign channels you like.It is 1000 times netter than American corporate media which just brain wash American people.

    Thanks for INTERNET for opening my eyes and I am not brain washed like others.

    You can just ask Americans.Most cannot even point a country in world map.

    They consider Europe as a country.



    • http://anewtattoo.com Guest

      I live in US and onlly have internet for everything. I have not tv or cable. I watch new online from all over the world and it does seem to different. I know that Europe is not a country btw…lol

  • Jack

    Hey, o great critic of Murdoch, you wrote:

    No wonder people are dropping the Murdoch news channels like fox which is ****dumping***** down America for long time and looking to foreign news channels like BBC and Internet.

    Obviously, you were dumped down in public skool, dumb ass (yes, “dumb ass is two words, I didn’t get that “dumping down” you got).

    • Guest

      f..k you stupid right wing nut job..

  • http://www.beachconnection.net Guest

    To me this all seems very shortsighted, and a sure sign some old dude does not get the Net. Being a small and niche news purveryor on the net myself (http://www.beachconnection.net) , I am watching w/ great interest what the rest of the industry does.

    He did point out that the other online publications aren’t raking in great cash….whihc is true. But a lot of that is i don’t think the market is allowing us to charge what we are actually worth yet – which in many cases is WAAAY more effective advertising and promotions than any print product.

    Plus, there are other impending changes in technology that will undoubtedly lead to full-sized newspaper-like layout online….probably within ten years.

    But i’m still pretty convinced keeping news free….and UTILIZING the traffic of google news, et al…..is the way to go. Pay-for-news, i believe, is likely to bite them in the end.

    So a big part of me is saying: go ahead dinosaurs…do your fancy pay-thing. You’ll just leave the market open to rest of us that much sooner….and us online folks will be wearing the top hats, smoking fat cigars and drinking coignac as we walk over your carcasses.

  • Guest

    He obviously doesn’t know that internet users don’t have any of their assets as homepages or embedded as search enignes in their browsers. No matter how much you have you have to understand the market you are talking about first, then threaten it.

    He is so funny, like anyone cares if his media finally stops polluting the net. A trend? ha, everybody will wait until they see how bad they do and have to allow their content to be indexed again and then they will say: “Glad we didn’t hop on that load of bull”. All they have to do is see where they get their traffic from.

    Personally blocking their content would be a great move for the public, it would allow less biased info to come through. Go ahead I will be there to hear the bang when their a55 hits the ground.

    Haha, I’m still laughing with this guy!!!

    – Kostas Yiatilis MacFarlane

  • Guest

    Rupert is a smart man to amass such great wealth. But he’s to old and disconnected from today’s reality of technology. Google News is good for his business because they refer readers directly to the sources of the content. Hire some smart guys Ruppie you have the money, then shut up and listen to them.

  • Guest

    The author forgot to mention that Murdock’s MySpace has a 900 million search deal with Google that is going south. Murdock is angry that he is not generating the $ he thought he would with the deal and is positioning himself to try and renegotiate. He bought the WSJ that already had online subscribers who get their paper. That model won’t translate to his other online garbage like the Post.

  • http://www.surveychicken.com Survey Chicken

    All media is manipulated and misconstrued in its own way. Sometimes you need to step back and see it from a 3rd person perspective instead of just believing in the garbage that the media floods the airwaves with.

  • http://AnewTaTToo.com Tom G

    The news seems to be all bad topics and nothing at all about the good things going on. I would rather pay to read a news article about the good in people or how people are helping each other survive in these rough times. Reading more of that would maybe inspire others to join in and help too.

  • Guest

    Thank God for Fox News and for Mr. Murdoch. They are telling the truth and standing up against the forces of Hell. When I read the various sick and twisted comments by people who attack Fox and Mr. Murdoch it just makes me realize even more how important the truth of Christianity is to the world.

    • Guest

      I’m a christian but I also belive Murdoch is an idiot that gives a very biased and narrow minded view of the world.

    • Guest

      They do not tell the truth. It has been well documented. All you have to do is open your mind. Murdoch and Fox have nothing to do with Christ, God, or Christianity. They merely use religion to mislead and manipulate the ignorant. Jesus did not say lies and spin will set you free. He said the truth will. Stop being a pusillanimous idiot and have enough courage to research your Murdoch version of so-called “truth” and open your eyes and learn.

    • Guest

      Truth of Christianity!!!? What the f is that?

    • Concerned Christian

      No Christian should have any part of Fox News and it’s sensationalist, over the top, disrespectful of opinions other than it’s own, judgmental attitude.

      Its opinion pieces seek only to divide and stir up anger, even hatred and from experience that’s true of all Murdoch-owned news outlets. If you seriously think that is “Christian truth” in any shape or form, then I fear for your soul. Christ certainly didn’t hate, lie or bend the truth. When He said “love one another” that was not a platitude intended to make the disciples feel good. It was a COMMAND, to all of His followers, and it’s still in force.

      Speaking of News Corp’s properties, you are aware of their UK newspaper “The Sun” and its famous Page 3 Girls? Are you sure you still want to thank God for Mr Murdoch and his “Christian truth”? I don’t recall anywhere in the New Testament where Jesus commanded “ladies, get your kit off for the lads”, do you?

      I wonder, perhaps Fox News/News Corp. is the “false church” which the Book of Revelation speaks of, certainly there are a lot of people who should know better yet who treat the lies and hate it spews as some sort of Gospel-truth just because it happens to agree with their political viewpoint and thus gives them the warm fuzzies. Satan has a way of tricking people like that, you know.

  • http://www.arco-studwelding.com Art

    Does this consider that the average punter will not bother about his info being blocked?
    It may be that business takes out subscriptions – but if we are talking “news” content – its already on TV and other media outlets.
    Its significant that with Sky and Foxtell et al worldwide…. the news channels are free to air.
    If they go PPV viewers will simply ignore his channels.

    People get tired of being expected to pay – just to view a page without adverts – and if Google is blocked… it cannot antipate an amount of revinue that currently get generated by search pages pointing to Murdochs web pages.

    The Internet is the perfect vehicles for the adage…”where there’s a will – there’s a way”.

    If Murdoch wants people to pay.. then the punter can chooose where his/her cash goes.

    • http://www.laokay.com Adsense Publisher

      I think Murdoch should put a compromise in place.

      Free Version
      No full article Publishing
      Snippets Allowed
      NOINDEX tag has to be in the robots meta tag for the page

      Paid Version
      Full Article Publishing Allowed
      Snippets Allowed
      No restrictions on indexing for the robots meta tag for the page

    • http://www.sfpincchicago.com sfpincchicago

      People are sometimes under the mistaken assumption that because something is online, it must be free. However, there is the cost of maintaining and upkeep of servers, time to post content online, access fees, webspace and bandwidth concerns, etc.

      Having said that, the whole point of advertising is to help offset some of these costs. Personally, we dislike ads on every page of a website. If you have a free site, then you can feel free to have ads. That’s the price you pay. However, if you are running a paid site, then said site should be ad-free, because if it isn’t, then what are you paying for?

  • http://www.sfpincchicago.com sfpincchicago

    Well, if Mr. Murdoch is going to insist on people paying for content, one of three things might happen.

    1) Everyone lines up to start a trend of paying for online news.
    2) Everyone goes the opposite road in an effort to lure away readers.
    3) The shift to print media may return.

    With regard to number 3, there has been a lot of talk about print media being a dying industry with easy access to online information, so what would be the difference between paying online and just reading the newspaper on the train to work like most people? It’s likely about the same cost, and possibly cheaper, since the newspapers will be attempting to encourage people to buy the print format. Overall, online content is cheap, since bandwidth and web space are minimal costs, but there could be a transition.

  • Guest

    This guy make money by selling papers and he is outdated and he is going down like the Titanic

  • Guest

    Rupert buys Google – Problem Solved.

    • Guest

      Google buys Rupert. Problem solved!!!

  • Guest

    Murdoch is symptomatic of everything that is wrong with the mass corporate media. By brainwashing about 30% of our US population with “facts” that are easily disprovable, he and his ilk have nearly destroyed what little hope for the future we and the world once had. May he and his kind burn in hell forever and ever and ever.

  • http://www.axiam-pc.co.uk Darren

    The internet is hear and now, everything is internet, internet, internet and to block your company from being advertised on search engine is not going to do your company any favours. Murdoch needs to embrace new technology and not try and kill it. Murdoch is trying to do the same thing to news that the record companies tried to do with music, eventually they realised they were wrong and joined the on-line distribution of their music, does Murdoch really think more people will buy his newspapers if he blocks them from the internet, no people will just view rival newspapers online, like The Guardian and they will make money from PPC advertising.

  • http://www.gpcleaningservices.co.uk Commercial Cleaning London

    Maybe Rupert needs a lesson in internet history! The walled garden was what allowed Google to establish itself in the first place. And look what happened to Yahoo et al…

  • http://www.goodsenseinfo.com Dave

    I could give less than a damn what the Murdochs of the world or the internet do. Most news including the WSJ, Fox and the rest are BS anyway. Maybe this will promote more real news, and the web will go back toward what it should be, a real exchange of real news for real people in the real world!!!


  • http://www.rokstok.com Andy M.

    I agree, the American Jouralism is in shambles and it’s traditionally impartial views have now been compromised. Why? Because idiots go to the internet and read some cheesy blog authored by someone who claims to be an expert and then assume it to be from the mouth of God. I can’t believe that as a society we have come to trust everything written on the internet as being accurate. Old media publishers have lost much of their marketshare to blogs, wikis, forums, etc. and now they’re forced to compromise their journalistic integrity to win over viewers and readers.

    What do you expect to happen? You gave up on them.

    • http://www.seo-works.com Peter (IMC)

      Traditionally impartial views?


  • http://www.seo-works.com Peter (IMC)

    It’s interesting that he’s so old and obviously talking without really understanding what he is saying.

    If they push this through it will be one of those stories where the main keyword will be “OOPS”.

    Paying for news in the way it’s suggested now just isnt going to happen anymore I think. If you analise it, nobody ever paid for news. What you paid for was for getting the news to you. For example, you paid for a newspaper subscription to get the news printed and brought to you. You paid cable tv so you can watch the news. You paid for your internet connection to access news websites.

    You never pay for the news itself as you believe that it is a basic right to have access to it.

    Also, you can’t really compete using the news itself. News is news, you can change the story to make it more attractive so people want to pay for your version of the news. (I know, people do choose a news channel based on their political bias, but that’s presentation and opinions, not the actual news content it self.)

    It’s going to be interesting to see what happens! That’s for sure.

    I wonder how they think they can get people to be like: “Yes of course,… let’s pay somebody for finding out what is going on in the world while I can get faster (don’t have to login) from other news sites.” “Yes, I’m going to pay somebody for something that I already am receiving for free.”

    Pay for news is only interesting for niches of which the news isn’t published by every news site in the world.

    • http://thatsnews.blogspot.com Thats News

      That’s a very good point!

  • http://thatsnews.blogspot.com That’s News

    So, The Times of London and Rupert’s other online publications will, when they banish themselves from Google -and every other search engine, too- and are 100% paid content, remove all adverts from the paid for pages? No?

    Well, here’s some news for Rupert. If the search engine hits drop to zero, as he wants, why would anyone want to book any adverts on his sites?

    “Hey! The page hits went to near zero! Quick! Pull our adverts!”

    Nice one, Rupert. Own goal!

    • http://tysaustralia.blogspot.com/ Ty Buchanan

      Right on man.

  • Guest

    “I can

  • Guest

    Good news. This will lead to less people reading the right wing and wall street scam content.

  • Peter

    For those of you who aren’t familar with the term “McCarthyism”, please look it up, then think about the legacy it has left. You should probably also watch a film called “The Corporation”.

    This is what happens when people with helpful ideas are shamed/cast aside so that the amoral and greedy can run amock with THEIR VERSION of capitalism.

    That’s right, THEIR VERSION: Not all who disagree with today’s flavour of capitalism (call it “turbo-capitalism”, if you want) are communists.

    Some, like me, are business people that have a semblance of morality, and believe that there should be more controls in place in ANY economic model, so that the world environment and the basic rights of individuals, including the right to ACCURATE, OBJECTIVE news, is held sancrosanct.

    The advent of the Internet/WWW has presented itself as ONE very useful control in terms of the accuracy/objectivity of news, and so I can imagine why people of Murdoch’s ilk must utterly detest it.

    I think you all need to ask yourselves, do you want the leaders that you elected making all of the (objective) decisions, or do you want proxy leaders like Murdoch shaping those decisions?

    I really hope this project of Murdoch’s is a catastrophe, and provides him with a “moment of clarity”.

  • http://www.JoeDuvernay.com Joseph Duvernay

    I have to say, I am not much more sanguine about this News Corp. and its
    waylaying of true democracy wherever it touches down.
    And no use do searchers for truth have for these (someone said, and I agree!) one-sided
    keep-the-tables-tilted-in-our-privileged-favor ‘hot-shots’ that think power over
    peoples lives is everything, which is surely missing the point of a balanced,
    happy, forward looking existence.
    To clear: if news is twisted to a doctrine or ideal, or left under or not reported, it is a lie!
    And obviously, I have lost any reservations (for the most part) against using one’s
    real name and parry it serves you well, any you!

  • http://www.cpasitesolutions.com Kenny

    I wouldn’t take anything he says too seriously. He clearly doesn’t even understand what he’s talking about. Hearing Rupert Murdoch talking about the internet is painful. It’s like listening to a waiter at Denny’s talking about the best way to perform laparoscopic heart surgery.

    It’s not likely that his investors are as technologically inept as he is. They’ll quietly sit him down in a conference room with a big white board with lots of colored pens and a calculator and explain to him that if he keeps saying stuff like that in public people will start to think he’s an idiot.

    Personally I don’t like “journalists” telling me what to think about the news. Just tell me the news and I’ll decide what to think about it all by myself. I never really looked at this as “news” anyway so if he can’t come to terms with the concept of the information age I’m not going to fret too much about seeing them tank.

    • Guest

      Ha ha ha, awsome comment. Couldn’t agree more. Love the description of the conference room with big white board and colored pens. You nailed it Kenny!

  • http://www.tennisopolis.com Tennis Partner

    I think they will indeed eliminate free content. I think Murdoch will start the trend here and everyone will follow – but then the established content providers will really be in a battle with the free blogosphere. That would be fun to watch!

    • Guest

      I don’t think everyone will follow this moron.

  • Guest

    There is a very informative Video on JibJab that shows what the current idiots of MSM of America represent.


  • SaneMan

    @Guest: There is a difference between being an idiot, and being evil. On a rational level, you cannot possibly think that Mr. Murdoch is an idiot. As a general rule, idiots do not control empires.

    • Guest

      Unless it is an empire of idiots. That’s what I think we are for letting people like him control what happens on the earth.

    • http://tysaustralia.blogspot.com/ Ty Buchanan

      Hitler was a mad idiot.

  • http://picturemousemat.com tski

    lets just deal with the problem simply, cant Murdoch simply be blocked from the internet? maybe an online restraining order or something?

    • http://rapidcoolrooms.com.au Guest

      yes, that would be an interesting idea but I doubt its possible

  • Kain

    “By Guest (WPN reader) – Mon, 11/09/2009 – 10:52
    Great, Everybody line up and

    Great, Everybody line up and pay to get lied to and brainwashed from a narrow single point of view.

    If you use Google as your search engine you already are so whats the problem

  • Rod

    Talk about lining your pockets with self-serving lies! Hey Gore! How much money have YOU made off your snake-oil sales pitch? Honestly dude, wake up and smell the scam! You cant rant about one source of propaganda and half-truths while supporting another source of propaganda and half-truths!

  • Guest

    I don’t think there are too many stupid people. He might get some business from the south though.

  • http://tysaustralia.blogspot.com/ Ty Buchanan

    This guy actually brought down an Australian Government by printing bad stuff about the party, in all his media. He is a very dangerous person.

  • http://tysaustralia.blogspot.com/ Ty Buchanan

    Everybidy wants to get on the pay bandwagon.

    Even Rapidshare who used to distribute “cracks” for free are now charging.

    What a cheek they have when they are alredy breaking the law.

  • http://promodrone.com Guest

    What a spineless, sniveling POS – PLEASE, WSJ, HIDE BEHIND YOUR PAYWALL SO WE DON”T HAVE TO BE BLINDED BY PRO-CORPORATIST DRIVEL!!!!!! WSJ is a sleazy, politically motivated,
    robber-baron enterprise that has no business even being in the same sector classification as a product of the “Fifth Estate”. Why don’t you bend over some more for your hot beef injection from your shareholder pimp clientele. And as for the poster who stated the fact that he always sides with Israel (fascist bastard nuke-owners), “DUH?!?!?” – HE’S JEWISH – WHY WOULDN’T HE TAKE THEIR SIDE CONSISTENTLY?!?!?!?!? AAAAAARRRRGGGHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I’ll use this spot to say that the next planned 9/11 (and we all KNOW it was an inside job) happens there – and you won’t have to worry about the pay wall interrupting biased coverage of this. And for those ready to scream “Anti-Semite” – GO RIGHT AHEAD. My personal analysis over the last 20 years leads me to not give a crap about any of that and stick to the “Facts” – and not the ones given off by that
    piss-poor excuse for a journalism rag. Go ahead, Rupert, put ALL your crap coverage behind the paywall so we can get an objective view point of the deadly geo-political mess that’s going to come back to the US when everyone gets tired of it and the “Big Stick” policies that’ve dominated for the last century almost. Screw ‘em – save your money – no use after 2012 anyway…..

  • http://CommonSenseLiving.com Carole

    How many of the commenters have links to websites? Are you hoping to make money from your content? Why? Why don’t you just give it away?

    Could it be –

    it costs you time and money to produce?
    you’re hoping to feed your family?
    you wouldn’t be doing it at all if there wasn’t a hope of making money?

    Regardless of whether you like his views or his products, the fact remains that he is a shrewd businessman. You could have learned a lot from this interview. I suggest you listen to it again and put your bias aside.

  • http://www.freexboxlivefast.com FreeXboxLiveFast

    Great Article Hope to see more.

  • Join for Access to Our Exclusive Web Tools
  • Sidebar Top
  • Sidebar Middle
  • Sign Up For The Free Newsletter
  • Sidebar Bottom