DebbieCDC
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-09-09 02:24 PM
Response to Original message |
|
I don't read his crap anyway.
|
| -Rupert Murdoch could ban Google access to his newspapers' content |
Mr. Sparkle |
Nov-09-09 09:40 AM |
#0 |
 -
He owns it, and it's his right. nt |
Captain Hilts |
Nov-09-09 09:41 AM |
#1 |
  -
Who cares? Way to become irrelevant. Anyone who has paid for news content raise your hand? |
imdjh |
Nov-09-09 09:46 AM |
#4 |
| -
Here it is: THE INTERNET TREATS CENSORSHIP. AS A MALFUNCTION. AND ROUTES AROUND IT |
imdjh |
Nov-09-09 09:48 AM |
#5 |
| -
I paid the annual $50 for access to the NYT and its archive. I like to reward creative content. |
Captain Hilts |
Nov-09-09 09:54 AM |
#7 |
| -
I would argue that the NYT archive stories have already been paid for, but I was referring to ... |
imdjh |
Nov-09-09 10:00 AM |
#11 |
| -
You don't understand how this works. Advertising does not cover all costs |
Captain Hilts |
Nov-09-09 10:18 AM |
#17 |
| -
I would not pay for a Molly Ivins book. |
imdjh |
Nov-09-09 10:44 AM |
# |
| -
I'll also add that you get more information, more quicly by reading a paper copy, actually. nt |
Captain Hilts |
Nov-09-09 10:19 AM |
#18 |
| -
It's dirty and a waste of paper. |
imdjh |
Nov-09-09 10:44 AM |
#29 |
| -
Newsprint is among the things most easily recycled. Also good for garbage instead |
Captain Hilts |
Nov-09-09 01:01 PM |
#42 |
| -
That's insanely untrue! |
AllTooEasy |
Nov-09-09 11:52 AM |
#34 |
| -
It's too self-selecting. We learn less serendipitously. We learn more about what interests us. nt |
Captain Hilts |
Nov-09-09 01:00 PM |
#41 |
| -
Agree . . . we'd be better off without his crap on the internet!! |
defendandprotect |
Nov-09-09 10:39 AM |
#26 |
| -
WSJ Can Do It Because People Make Financial Decisions Based on Reporting |
NashVegas |
Nov-09-09 06:41 PM |
#48 |
| -
Good, there are other sources for information. n/t |
RKP5637 |
Nov-09-09 09:45 AM |
#2 |
| -
Has Rupert forgotten the purpose of his rags? |
phantom power |
Nov-09-09 09:46 AM |
#3 |
| -
That was my first thought. We can get Horoscopes somewhere else. nt |
valerief |
Nov-09-09 10:01 AM |
#13 |
| -
EXACTLY!!! n/t |
RKP5637 |
Nov-09-09 10:05 AM |
#14 |
| -
Oh yeah, don't forget you gtota pay to watch Fox News too. |
alp227 |
Nov-09-09 10:27 AM |
#23 |
| -
Let see how many Freepers actually pay for Fuax News Online,LOL! nt |
PJPhreak |
Nov-09-09 12:43 PM |
#39 |
| -
Hasn't every attempt to charge for online newspapers failed miserably? |
NewJeffCT |
Nov-09-09 09:54 AM |
#6 |
| -
What about other newspapers that require pay for archives? |
alp227 |
Nov-09-09 12:48 PM |
#40 |
| -
Not All, But Most |
NashVegas |
Nov-09-09 06:45 PM |
#49 |
| -
Who needs Sir Ruprecht Morlock |
Cirque du So-What |
Nov-09-09 09:55 AM |
#8 |
| -
His add revenue will plumet. Let him. |
Xipe Totec |
Nov-09-09 09:56 AM |
#9 |
| -
I'll donate! |
Uben |
Nov-09-09 09:56 AM |
#10 |
| -
So he gets less viewers and that increases his pile of gold how? |
high density |
Nov-09-09 10:00 AM |
#12 |
| -
And make Faux News a premium channel like HBO! |
Dr.Phool |
Nov-09-09 10:16 AM |
#15 |
| -
YES!! DO IT!! n/t |
Ian David |
Nov-09-09 10:16 AM |
#16 |
| -
PLEASE do it! Then I won't have Faux shit clogging up my Internet |
mbperrin |
Nov-09-09 10:21 AM |
#19 |
| -
You mean he's going to abandon one of his propaganda catapults? |
Doctor_J |
Nov-09-09 10:22 AM |
#20 |
| -
He is of course, 100% full of shit. Which everyone here knows. |
harun |
Nov-09-09 07:43 PM |
#56 |
| -
What better way to marginalize your own news sources! |
emsimon33 |
Nov-09-09 10:23 AM |
#21 |
| -
It's all propaganda anyway |
liberal N proud |
Nov-09-09 10:23 AM |
#22 |
| -
He won't. |
Orsino |
Nov-09-09 10:30 AM |
#24 |
| -
Every Fox page has a Copyright. According to the Napster case, |
Downwinder |
Nov-09-09 10:35 AM |
#25 |
| -
Good! |
BattyDem |
Nov-09-09 10:43 AM |
#27 |
| -
Let him do it. Who reads the WSJ? Would be plutocrats and dreamers. |
PHIMG |
Nov-09-09 10:44 AM |
#28 |
| -
Meh... |
Rebubula |
Nov-09-09 11:05 AM |
#30 |
| -
Well at least in the US, I say "good, let him". Who would give a fuck......... |
pattmarty |
Nov-09-09 11:08 AM |
#31 |
| -
He's already effectively doing it for me, in the UK |
muriel_volestrangler |
Nov-09-09 11:10 AM |
#32 |
| -
Can you say "self-defeating strategy," people? |
BreweryYardRat |
Nov-09-09 11:34 AM |
#33 |
| -
if is it imporant it can be gotten elsewhere - most is not news anyway n/t |
2Design |
Nov-09-09 12:20 PM |
#35 |
| -
And this is bad news how? |
Downtown Hound |
Nov-09-09 12:29 PM |
#36 |
| -
Oh my! |
Jazzgirl |
Nov-09-09 12:29 PM |
#37 |
| -
Who cares its a birdcage liner like all his rags. |
Historic NY |
Nov-09-09 12:30 PM |
#38 |
| -
Good! I've already blocked Fox from Google news |
depakid |
Nov-09-09 01:36 PM |
#43 |
| -
He'll be doing everybody in the world a favor--except himself |
librechik |
Nov-09-09 02:23 PM |
#44 |
| -
Fine by me |
DebbieCDC |
Nov-09-09 02:24 PM |
#45 |
| -
When I google "fox news" I want |
safeinOhio |
Nov-09-09 02:25 PM |
#46 |
| -
That would not make me ... |
gleaner |
Nov-09-09 06:38 PM |
#47 |
| -
robots.txt |
boppers |
Nov-09-09 06:49 PM |
#50 |
| -
No kidding ... |
RoyGBiv |
Nov-09-09 07:22 PM |
#52 |
| -
Fair Use ... Video |
RoyGBiv |
Nov-09-09 07:34 PM |
#54 |
| -
It would be considered a public service. |
Owl |
Nov-09-09 07:02 PM |
#51 |
| -
Good. Let it be more difficult to access Murdoch's GOP-connected outlets |
lily kitch |
Nov-09-09 07:25 PM |
#53 |
| -
I am sure he is one of the fuckers pushing to end net neutrality. fuck him nt |
conspirator |
Nov-09-09 07:39 PM |
#55 |
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread