A Look At All The Sites Owned By Rupert Murdoch That 'Steal' Content

from the who-ya-gonna-block-now,-rupert? dept

As Rupert Murdoch talks about how he wants to cut off Google, while claiming that aggregator sites are “parasites” and “stealing” from him — and that fair use would likely be barred by the courts, it seemed like a good time to examine at least some of the sites that are owned by Rupert Murdoch that appear to aggregate content from other sites and which rely on the very same fair use argument. We’ve mentioned a few in the past, but figured it wouldn’t hurt to explore them more thoroughly.

Well, let’s start with the flagship Wall Street Journal itself. It integrates its own “aggregator” with headlines and links to other stories. For example, on the WSJ’s tech news page if you scroll down, you’ll find a bunch of headlines and links to other sources — without permission:

Oops. Looks like the WSJ is “parasiting” and “stealing” according to Murdoch. Perhaps he should cut them of too.

Okay, how about Fox News itself? Yup. It’s got an aggregator as well. Here’s its Politics Buzztracker that aggregates and links to stories from a variety of different publications, including the NY Times, the Washington Post, MSNBC and others:

Murdoch can’t be too happy about all that thieving.

Then we’ve got the folks over at AllThingsD, who I actually think do excellent work, and who have built up a nice part of their site called “Voices.” I actually quite like this and find it useful (and yes, every so often, they are kind enough to “parasite” one of my posts). In fact, it helps keep AllThingsD in my RSS reader because it’s so useful. But, damn, if that doesn’t look just like what Murdoch is complaining about. Not only does it have headlines, but also a fair bit of intro text (no summary, no commentary) and even the links are hidden at the bottom, rather than using the headlines as links:

Of course, it’s not just with news either. The folks at AlarmClock remind us that Murdoch’s News Corp. owns IGN, which has a variety of properties, including the ever popular RottenTomatoes movie review aggregation site. Yes, the entire site is based on “parasiting” (according to Murdoch) movie reviews off of every other site, and pulling them all together:
Good thing Murdoch is planning on working on ways to get the court to ban that sort of “fair use.”

Some other IGN sites don’t quite have aggregators, but I do find it interesting that they’ve integrated in Google search, such that you could do searches for things across the web and have them remain in a totally News Corp./IGN-branded experience. Effectively, on these pages, Murdoch’s own properties are able to “parasite” back Google’s own “parasite” engine. Here are two examples:

I’m sure there are probably more examples of various News Corp. properties regularly doing exactly what Murdoch and other News Corp. execs are now decrying as illegal and which must be stopped. So, it has to be asked, Mr. Murdoch, will you pull down all of these sites?

Filed Under: , , , ,
Companies: news corp

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “A Look At All The Sites Owned By Rupert Murdoch That 'Steal' Content”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
67 Comments
News nCorpse (user link) says:

You left out...

…the biggest para-site of all: Fox Nation.

Fox Nation is built from the ground up to “steal” content from around the web.

Murdoch is a first-class hypocrite. He can shut down Google’s indexing anytime he wants with a simple “disallow” in his robots.txt file. Now he says he will stop Google, but only after he erects his pay wall. Guess what? With a subscription only site, Google can’t access his content anyway.

Idiot!

Mark Harris (profile) says:

Murdoch's master plan?

He’s a wily old bird,rather than a fool, and I wonder if he’s got us all going in the wrong direction. While we point and laugh at him and say he “is too old and out of touch with how these tubes work”, perhaps he’s got a longer game in mind.

Bear with me. Newspapers around the world watch what Murdoch does and then follow suit. What if his game is to get them all to put paywalls up and isolate themselves, spending fortunes to do so on the promise of exclusive deals and fortunes to come (“why would Murdoch do it if it wasn’t going to make money?” they’ll say)? Then, when they’re committed to the new system, and deeper in debt, News Corp will have a “change of heart”, drop the paywalls (that they never actually built) and embrace openness and sharing. Several major papers would go to the wall, and be ripe for takeover by a still cash-rich News Corp.

Just a thought.

BobinBaltimore (profile) says:

Re: Murdoch's master plan?

Strongly agreed.

Mike has a great point (though FoxNews Buzztracker is dead, as far as I can tell…Mike had to grab and old link on origin2.foxnews.com). Murdoch definitely has some major inconsistencies to deal with.

That said, he is no one’s fool and has turned crap into gold many, many times before. It is silly and historically inaccurate to portray him as quixotic, out-of-touch or stupid. Doesn’t mean he hasn’t and won’t again make a bad call, but it does mean that there is a definite (and most often successful) method to his madness.

Tyler (user link) says:

Re: Murdoch's master plan?

Mark, I had similar thoughts but not as well thought out as your scenario. But I agree entirely that Murdoch isn’t as foolish as we think or as foolish as he presents himself. He’s definitely up to something.

Excellent idea, I think you’re on to something for sure.

Danny Sullivan posted an interesting article on mashable, might be worth a read, Would Someone Please Explain To News Corp How Google Works?

Anonymous Coward says:

I think you will find that most of the sites they are parasiting from they in fact own or operate.

Further, the first example is a series of nice text links off and nothing else no first paragraph or anything. It isn’t parasiting when the read cannot enjoy the story without visiting the site.

It’s a really nice try to slam Ol’ Rupe, but it just makes you look like an Ol’ rube.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

Fox owns MSNBC and CNN, every mainstream movie review written, and Engadget? News to me. Ugh, even more sites I have to avoid now.

Hmm, let’s head on over to Google News. Oh no, a headline AND A WHOLE SENTENCE OR TWO! THE HORROR! Why would I ever need to read more than a 2 lines of text to get a news story?

And by your definition of parasiting…half of the News Corp-owned sites are…still parasiting, and doing it even more than Google News. Oops.

I just realized that you can rearrange the letters in your name to spell “Terrible Troll.” What communist leader is paying your bills? WHY AM I THE ONLY ONE ASKING THESE QUESTIONS!?!?

Mike Masnick (profile) says:

Re: Re:

I think you will find that most of the sites they are parasiting from they in fact own or operate.

That is simply not true.

Further, the first example is a series of nice text links off and nothing else no first paragraph or anything. It isn’t parasiting when the read cannot enjoy the story without visiting the site.

Not particularly different than Google news, which often displays just a link to a story and no summary text.

Doctor Strange says:

Re: Re:

I didn’t go check every Murdoch property, but the examples above do little to convince me there is much “parasiting” going on.

The Marburgers report characterized parasiting as having enough of the content from an original source on your site to disincentivize people from clicking on the link. It’s unclear that headlines meet this standard, so the WSJ example is thin at best.

The Fox news example “parasites” articles from the AP and AFP. I could not find membership lists for the AP or AFP, but Murdoch is on the AP board. If I understand the AP correctly, it’s a cooperative. I do not know whether any Murdoch organizations compensate the AFP.

AllThingsD has a long page explaining that it is cognizant of the issues with parasiting/scraping and the measures used to maximize the number of people who actually click on the link. There is also a well-documented way to opt-out.

The RottenTomatoes site has a page where it pretty clearly indicates that the critics on the site must opt-in and meet certain criteria before being aggregated.

Google freely offers the search on your site feature, and in fact encorages people to use it. It’s hard to understand how this is equivalent to parasiting, especially by the Marburger definition: if Murdoch was scraping off Google’s ads and such in the result pages to display his own maybe you’d have a point.

Mike Masnick (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

I didn’t go check every Murdoch property, but the examples above do little to convince me there is much “parasiting” going on.

Indeed. I agree. In fact, that’s the whole point. Sorry if you missed that.

The Marburgers report characterized parasiting as having enough of the content from an original source on your site to disincentivize people from clicking on the link.

Who said anything about the Marburgers? We’re using Murdoch’s definition.

The Fox news example “parasites” articles from the AP and AFP.

No, that’s not true. It uses links from the NY Times, the Washington Post and MSNBC. I don’t believe Murdoch is on the board of any of those.

AllThingsD has a long page explaining that it is cognizant of the issues with parasiting/scraping and the measures used to maximize the number of people who actually click on the link. There is also a well-documented way to opt-out.

Gee… just like that “parasite” Google News.

Thanks for proving the point, even if you thought you were disproving it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re: Re:

“Who said anything about the Marburgers? We’re using Murdoch’s definition.”

But, you can rearrange the letters in “Mr. Murdoch” to make “Marburgers!” Is it an EVIL AUSTRALIAN SOCIALIST FASCIST PLOT TO TAKE OVER AMERICA’S NEWSPAPERS!? Why am I the only one asking these questions!?

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re:

I think you will find that most of the sites they are parasiting from they in fact own or operate.

They “parasite” from lots of sites they don’t own.

Further, the first example is a series of nice text links off and nothing else no first paragraph or anything. It isn’t parasiting when the read cannot enjoy the story without visiting the site.

Gee, that’s not exactly how Murdoch looks at it when Google does it.

It’s a really nice try to slam Ol’ Rupe, but it just makes you look like an Ol’ rube.

Did you have to use ‘lube to get your head that far up Ol’ Rupe?

Allen (profile) says:

Negotiations

Murdoch knows search and news have become symbiotic. But he wants a larger slice of the pie. Understanding his starting position is weak he’s come out with a threat made credible by his reputation as a septuagenarian autocrat.

Murdoch and his advisers are not stupid: they know the threat to block their content from google is empty, but they need to start somewhere in their bid for a share of the advertising dollars that google has lured away from them.

It’s just Negotiations.

alternatives() says:

Where is the google-fu gods?

I now await the scripting and google gods to determine where each of the Rubert owned sites are pulling from, publish a list of the contacts and ask:

What if these sites cut off Mr. Murdock?

And include a sample communication, if one was to write asking if they have considered blocking Mr. Murdock’s properties.

jehode says:

Poor Old Rupert!

Lay off Rupert Murdoch, this great man has forged an empire, first dragging the print world into the 21st century by alienating workers and proudly ignoring working peoples decent rights (Wapping anyone?) and then building up his telemedia empire.
All this with not one thought about profit, simply a deep love and affection for the world of sport and his audience.
Not for him the world of buying and selling for profit. I feel sure everything he does is for the greater good of telemedia, society and the world as a whole.
I’m sure I have the right person dont I?

brucemcf (profile) says:

That's just the fringes of NewsCorp hypocrisy ...

… 20th Century Fox’s MySpaceCDN servers are among the favorite free streaming hosts for bootleg anime streaming sites. I don’t know where MySpaceCDN sits with respect to MySpace, but given that NewsCorp will be out somewhere in the range of $100m ad payment from google due to the drop in traffic in MySpace, it could be speculated that MySpaceCDN is less responsive in cleaning up anime bootlegs than other sites such as Megavideo or Veoh because when the NewsCorp dollars are on the other side of the “pirate bay” issues, then that’s just different.

Joan says:

Rupert Merdoch is a BIG Pharma Genocidalist!

Rupert Murdoch owns the Murdoch Children’s Research Institute in Australia that conducts guinea pig swine flu trials on little kids.
His mother, Elizabeth conducts vax testing on pregnant women at the Victoria Women’s hospital in Melbourne. His son James is the the Overseer of Glaxo Smith Kline, He is behind a genocidal scheme to kills us off for population control. Rupert Murdoch is co-chairman for David Rockefeller’s partnership for New York City. The partnership is the core of the evil. They were responsible for taking down the WTC to bring about the Patriot Act, and responsible for rebuilding it. Thomas Glocer the CEO of Reuters and the Director of Merck pharmaceuticals is also on the board.
See FluScamdotcom

Joan says:

Rupert Merdoch is a BIG Pharma Genocidalist!

Rupert Murdoch owns the Murdoch Children’s Research Institute in Australia that conducts guinea pig swine flu trials on little kids.
His mother, Elizabeth conducts vax testing on pregnant women at the Victoria Women’s hospital in Melbourne. His son James is the the Overseer of Glaxo Smith Kline, He is behind a genocidal scheme to kills us off for population control. Rupert Murdoch is co-chairman for David Rockefeller’s partnership for New York City. The partnership is the core of the evil. They were responsible for taking down the WTC to bring about the Patriot Act, and responsible for rebuilding it. Thomas Glocer the CEO of Reuters and the Director of Merck pharmaceuticals is also on the board.
See FluScamdotcom

Leave a Reply to Lee Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...