Are British Papers Going To Start Demanding Payments From Drudge?

from the this-is-a-local-paper,-for-local-people dept

While some British newspapers have realized that Google (and other sites that send them traffic) are helpful to them, there are still plenty that feel like Google should be paying them, for some reason. It's a strange argument: Google sends them traffic and readers, yet should be paying for that "privilege"? If the papers can't figure out how to monetize the traffic Google and other sites send them, that's their own problem. Now comes word, though, that The Drudge Report sends UK papers more than three times the amount of traffic that Google does -- so will the papers start making noise about suing Drudge for a cut of his ad revenue? The editorial director of a UK news outfit illustrates the backwards mentality some papers have by saying "You are just paying an awful lot of bandwidth and an awful lot of server costs to serve those people." Well, if that's such a concern, why have a web presence at all? That would drive bandwidth and server costs down to pretty much zero. Instead of seeing international visitors and the additional traffic they generate as a burden, they should be seen for what they are -- an opportunity to further grow revenues and profits.

Filed Under: britain, media, newspapers
Companies: drudge report, google

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. identicon
    Hulser, 1 Aug 2007 @ 9:02am


    Drudge merely copies the title - or provides his own - and links to the article. Google, otoh, provides a snippet of the article. I guess, maybe, that's the difference.
    This is a very good point. The "snippet" that Google makes available on its news page looks to be about 30 to 40 words. With the short attention span of many web readers, this may be all that many people would want to read. They might get all of the information they want from the snippets without ever having to follow the link to the full news story.

    Based on my own experience, I read far more of the snippets than I do the linked articles. If this holds true for most other people, then the Google audience is deriving quite a bit of value from content that is generated by somebody other than Google.

    Personally, I think that the news content providers get more out of the deal than they lose, but I believe that it should be acknowledged that the snippets do replace some of the traffic that would otherwise have been directed to the original source site.

Add Your Comment

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

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Insider Shop - Show Your Support!

Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.