After a little prompting Rupert Murdoch gave it straight when asked what he thought of Guardian editor Alan Rusbridger's vision of a future without paywalls: "I think that sounds like BS to me." (BS being the faux-polite version of bullshit, presumably used so that his own media organisations didn't have to asterisk out their boss's comment).
My colleague Andrew Clark (who is older than he looks) only managed to elicit that response on the second attempt to get Murdoch's thoughts on Rusbridger's Cudlipp lecture argument that paywalls around newspaper websites could lead the industry to "sleepwalk into oblivion". When Clark first inquired: "I don't know if you've read Alan Rusbridger's speech... ?" Murdoch replied with a terse "No."
Maybe the News Corp chairman would think differently if he read the whole speech and considered its nuances. Or maybe not.
Unveiling News Corp's $254m profits for the last three months of 2009, Murdoch also declared:
"Content is not just king, it is the emperor of all things digital. We're on the cusp of a digital revolution from which our shareholders will profit handsomely."
Murdoch added that hyped-technology such as the iPad and the Kindle would be "unloved and unsold...ingenious and fabulous devices" without the content created by media companies. Before adding:
"Instead of the existential debate about value, now we're merely arguing about valuation. Consumers want content delivered immediately and on a variety of devices. They're willing to be paid to be entertained and informed."
Mr Murdoch and his cohorts may now only be talking about how much and how they will charge readers. While many in the industry hope that he is right, not everyone who spends their time on the worldwideweb agrees.
Sources: Guardian/paidContent
