This entry was posted
on Monday, September 10th, 2007 at 6:57 am.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
5 Responses to “Guardian column: Google and the wires”
Wire services are CERTAINLY benefiting much more from Goog’s links, then vice versa. And, you’re right, I said this when Scoble predicted that Mahalo et al. would “beat” Google by having better and more trusted searches: Google is no longer a “search-engine”, it’s a CMS.
The heart of this is not big/traditional media fear of our voices in response to theirs on an article by article level. It is what lies beyond the them/us (writers/readers) divide that scares the bejeesus out of them, which is that we are the free press. The scope of blogging adoption, and the fact that many bloggers couldn’t be characterized as press both obscures and empowers this. I am seeing one overriding goal in every agenda, which is to remain in control of the ‘title’ …and therefore the authority …and therefore the information.
CNN and Reuters is a lovely example, btw. Why would the US press support competition against AP, the nonprofit cooperative (monopolistic organ) which we can’t link to without paying license fees?
[...] that, as Matthew Ingram point out, is the problem with the wire services’ deal with Google that enables the aggregator to now display full stories not from the source but from the wires, [...]
[...] it was 15 years ago, is that we are all now publishers, just as I commented on Jeff Jarvis’s post pointing to his column in the Guardian today about Google becoming a content [...]
September 10th, 2007 at 9:15 am
Wire services are CERTAINLY benefiting much more from Goog’s links, then vice versa. And, you’re right, I said this when Scoble predicted that Mahalo et al. would “beat” Google by having better and more trusted searches: Google is no longer a “search-engine”, it’s a CMS.
September 10th, 2007 at 1:13 pm
The heart of this is not big/traditional media fear of our voices in response to theirs on an article by article level. It is what lies beyond the them/us (writers/readers) divide that scares the bejeesus out of them, which is that we are the free press. The scope of blogging adoption, and the fact that many bloggers couldn’t be characterized as press both obscures and empowers this. I am seeing one overriding goal in every agenda, which is to remain in control of the ‘title’ …and therefore the authority …and therefore the information.
CNN and Reuters is a lovely example, btw. Why would the US press support competition against AP, the nonprofit cooperative (monopolistic organ) which we can’t link to without paying license fees?
September 13th, 2007 at 3:04 pm
[...] that, as Matthew Ingram point out, is the problem with the wire services’ deal with Google that enables the aggregator to now display full stories not from the source but from the wires, [...]
September 29th, 2007 at 3:58 pm
[...] it was 15 years ago, is that we are all now publishers, just as I commented on Jeff Jarvis’s post pointing to his column in the Guardian today about Google becoming a content [...]
October 1st, 2007 at 6:00 am
[...] Guardian column: Google and the wires [...]