BBC capitulation paves way for Murdoch web charge

Emboldened by the BBC’s capitulation to Murdoch with its commitment to slash the number of journalists on its website, he will now charge for online content.

Emboldened by the BBC’s capitulation to Rupert Murdoch with its commitment to slash the number of journalists employed providing content for its terrific website, he has done it: from June this year, The Times and The Sunday Times will no longer be free online. The BBC had acted as a barrier to Murdoch’s ambitions to charge for the web. With the barrier breached others are waiting with baited breath to see if it will work.

Let’s get one thing straight: the decline of newspaper sales is a structural problem – the internet is merely a component. As John Nichols has written in The Nation:

“Blame has been laid first and foremost on the Internet, for luring away advertisers and readers, and on the economic meltdown, which has demolished revenues and hammered debt-laden media firms. But for all the ink spilled addressing the dire circumstance of the ink-stained wretch, the understanding of what we can do about the crisis has been woefully inadequate.

Charging for content is not the answer. While, unlike America, we have more of a spread of newspapers. The Guardian, albeit protected as it is from its Trust status, provides quality alternative coverage. Nevertheless as consumers of news we can ask why did our journalists, with some honourable exceptions, fail so miserably in forecasting the global economic crisis? Could it be that it was in the media bosses’ interests to go along with the orthodoxy of an unfettered free market?

Likewise the line on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq was bought hook line and sinker with Murdoch’s titles in particular all supporting the war.

There has been an economic decline in newspapers, there has also been a decline in content exacerbated by cost cutting in the number of journalists employed. Critical inquiry on the two of the defining issues of our times went absent without leave. Arguably, while newspapers become views papers, then people may want to pay for comment. The specialist information of, say the Financial Times and the Wall Street Journal, would be worth paying for.

But who under 30 is going to pay for general news? As the House of Lord select committee on communications reported:

“Younger people are less likely to read a newspaper than any other age group. The figures we [the select committee] commissioned from the National Readership Survey showed that overall the number of people reading any one or more of the top ten national newspapers on an average day has declined by 19% (between 1992-2006), but this decline is much more marked in the younger age brackets.

The number of 15-24 year olds reading any one or more of the top ten national newspapers on an average day has declined by 37% and the number of 25-34 years olds doing the same has declined by 40%.”

And young people, used as they are to free content online, won’t start paying now.

This week has also seen another twist in media ownership with Andrei Lebdev buying the Independent. With perfect timing on the day Murdoch announces he is going to charge for website content it is being asked whether Mr Lebedev’s Independent may follow the Evening Standard, and become a free-sheet. The Independent, despite Murdoch’s predatory pricing that once was used to try and strangle competitors, survived.

And while at times it has had to cling on for dear life, it has survived through journalistic content that provides alternative opinions. Reform of media ownership is back on the agenda. Trying to get people to pay for content and access to information on the Internet is not the model we should be following.

As you’re here, we have something to ask you. What we do here to deliver real news is more important than ever. But there’s a problem: we need readers like you to chip in to help us survive. We deliver progressive, independent media, that challenges the right’s hateful rhetoric. Together we can find the stories that get lost.

We’re not bankrolled by billionaire donors, but rely on readers chipping in whatever they can afford to protect our independence. What we do isn’t free, and we run on a shoestring. Can you help by chipping in as little as £1 a week to help us survive? Whatever you can donate, we’re so grateful - and we will ensure your money goes as far as possible to deliver hard-hitting news.

16 Responses to “BBC capitulation paves way for Murdoch web charge”

  1. Ali Esbati

    RT @leftfootfwd: BBC capitulation paves way for Murdoch web charge:

  2. Steve Rooney

    RT @leftfootfwd: BBC capitulation paves way for Murdoch web charge:

  3. leebo

    RT @leftfootfwd: BBC capitulation paves way for Murdoch web charge:

  4. Anne Marte

    RT @aliesbati: RT @leftfootfwd: BBC capitulation paves way for Murdoch web charge:

  5. Billy Blofeld

    The BBC is a state owned monopoly – good luck to Murdoch in trying to compete with them.

  6. Mr. Sensible

    The BBC fear a Tory government. The Tories, as we all know seem to have done a deal with Newscorp.

    This is disgraceful underhand politics.

  7. Mr. Sensible

    Billy, what is Newscorp if not a monopoly, then?

    And that monopoly will be aided by Cameron if he ever gets in to government.

    Look at their policies, including reducing the power of Ofcom, and thus cutting protection for viewers.

    That has got Murdock written all over it.

  8. Look Left – The Week in Fast Forward | Left Foot Forward

    […] News Corporation’s announcement that The Times will be introducing a paywall was widely ridiculed on […]

  9. evidence based really?

    Mr Sensible; what a lot of rubbish! The Tories have done an underhand deal with Murdoch?!? The Murdoch empire has just spent the last 13 years supporting Labour, although i suppose that was compelety different (mostly because you didn’t find it convieniant to make up the idea of a deal).

    Also Murdoch is not a monopoly, there are plenty of tv channels (itv, channel four BBC and Five) and newspapers (The mirror, guardian, independant etc etc) that provide competition.

    There is a serious point about the size of the bbc’s news production, if we have a massive, free bbc news corp then its going to have a serious impact on private news corps; which, to the general public provide differing sources of information on which basis people can make there minds up.

    Incidently i think the BBC website is fantastic, although on needs to be careful it doesn’t shut out other news outlets, which positvely contribute to a plurality of views.

    Please have more sense than to characterise this as Private (or murdoch)= bad, state (bbc) = good. It is far more complex.

  10. Mr. Sensible

    ‘Evidence-based? Really?’ I’m afraid the argument that there is competition to the Murdock empire is a smokescreen; look how Sky are protesting at the ruling by I think the OFT relating to sports rights?

    And you say there’s no deal? Is that why Cameron wants to strip the regulator of a lot of its powers?

    And if we want other news websites to flurrish, then surely the last thing to do is turn readers away. I will be interested to see how much of its readership the times website loses.

    The Guardian is the paper I tend to read, along with the BBC website.

  11. Roll Around The Blogs. « ModernityBlog

    […] Foot Forward on the BBC’s capitulation and Murdoch, on the BNP barrister, Climate sceptic exhibition and Big Oil and disabled wrongly […]

  12. Cameron's "pro-BBC" claim fails to stand up to scrutiny | Left Foot Forward

    […] course we now know that the BBC capitulated to the Murdoch Empire after complaints that its free website which was outs-tripping its commercial competitors had […]

  13. offerte addobbi natalizi

    offerte addobbi natalizi

    kinderjeans mit gummizug damen t shirt xxl ersatzteile iphone 6s vidal sassoon haartrockner junge designer taschen online shops f眉r frauen schwarze kleider gro脽e gr枚脽en kinderregal aufbewahrung zoeva pinsel 322 dpd kundenservice telefonnummer secondi v…

  14. 屑邪褋泻邪 斜邪谢邪泻谢邪胁邪 褋褌懈泻褏邪薪褌 胁褟蟹邪薪邪褟 写械屑懈褋械蟹芯薪薪邪褟

    屑邪褋泻邪 斜邪谢邪泻谢邪胁邪 褋褌懈泻褏邪薪褌 胁褟蟹邪薪邪褟 写械屑懈褋械蟹芯薪薪邪褟

    泻褍锌懈褌褜 薪械写芯褉芯谐懈械 卸械薪褋泻懈械 褎褍褌斜芯谢泻懈 芯锌褌芯屑 邪褉褏懈胁 屑械褌邪谢懈褔械褋泻懈械 泻褉褞褔泻懈 写谢褟 锌芯写褌褟谐懈胁邪薪懈褟 懈谢懈 锌芯写薪褟褌懈褟 銈儶銈广儊銉c兂 銉囥偅銈兗銉?棣欐按 銈搞儯銉夈兗銉?edp sp 150ml christian 銈枫兗銉愩偆銈儹銈?銉戙兗銉嗐偅銉笺儛銉冦偘 銈儵銉冦儊銇€氳博 3鐐?銉堛偆銉優銉冦儓銈汇儍銉?2鐐?瀹夈亜 銇娿仐銈冦倢 銇嬨倧銇勩亜 鍙剾銇?銈炽兗銈搞兗 cuptoare cu micro…

  15. troler horizon lamonza

    troler horizon lamonza

    妤藉ぉ甯傚牬 haruta 銉忋儷銈?銉儑銈c偣 鐗涢潻銈炽偆銉炽儹銉笺儠銈°兗 閫氬闈?/a> 銈点兂銉€銉?銉°兂銈?銉娿儊銉ャ儵銉澊 銇娿仐銈冦倢 銈儠銈c偣 澶?鏄?鍐?銈点儨 70浠eコ鎬с伀浼煎悎銇嗐儸銉囥偅銉笺偣銉愩儍銈颁汉姘椼儢銉┿兂銉夈儵銉炽偔銉炽偘30閬?銈广儦銈枫儯銉偄銈︺儓銉儍銉堛偦銉笺儷闁嬪偓涓?poolside shoes outlet rochii per donna online jack wolfskin m cloudburst smock jacke…

  16. bart hals rasieren

    bart hals rasieren

    completo mtb invernale kit per unghie in gel puppenhaus mdf 眉bergang der steuerschuld bei bauleistungen amazon anmeldung nicht m枚glich entsch盲digung bei versp盲teten fl眉gen schlagschrauber akku hp probook ladekabel blumen stickerei lamette fusion power…

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.