Email to Tribune Staff Regarding Murdoch vs Google

I have received quite a few questions the past few days about Google News and the Rupert Murdoch situation. (You can view the latest info here: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/dec/03/were-no-thieves-murdoch-google)

I wanted to provide my feedback and open it up for specific questions that individuals may have that I could answer collectively. This topic is an important one, and I feel that it needs to be given proper attention. If you have questions regarding this topic, please email me directly and I’d be happy to answer them.

As most of you are aware, Murdoch and Google have been battling it out in a public forum for the past few months. The latest development on the Murdoch side has him stating that he will block Google from accessing his media empire, and that he is looking to partner with Bing (Microsoft) and convince them to pay him for the News Corp. content. (You can read the story regarding Murdoch/Bing at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/nov/24/rupert-murdoch-bing-google)

Google dominates the search industry with an approximate 70% share of search queries in the United States. While partnering with Bing is an interesting play for Murdoch, I highly doubt that it will force Google to do anything. And, it’s very doubtful that users would flock to Bing just to get the News Corp. content in their queries. However, having News Corp. properties removed from Google would help the Tribune sites to rank more favorably in Google simply due to the smaller amount of competition.

Meanwhile, Google has made a few updates to two major components of their algorithm. I have spelled out these updates as well as my take on how this relates back to the Murdoch situation.

1. Googlebot-News
• First, this week Google announced the creation of a new ‘user-agent’ named “Googlebot-News.” This will allow website owners to specifically control which content Google News can and can’t access. Previously, there was no way to specifically block Google News and allow Google Web to content, or vice versa. It was either all of, or none of Google. It is important to note that this is a monumental change, and Google can’t complete these changes in a few months. This type of change is one that takes significant infrastructure changes within Google. Considering this new feature went live this week, it is most likely something Google has been working on well before the Murdoch situation started to become such a large issue. I will also note that for over a year, there have been dozens of SEOs at publishing companies around the globe (myself included) that have complained loudly about this lack of flexibility. I can solidly state that this change is in no way a response to Murdoch. Via confidential contacts at Google, I’ve been told that they’ve been working on it for ‘an extensive amount of time’. Personally, I believe Google mainly because I know this would be a difficult change for Google to make. Also, the complaints on this particular issue have been out there for quite some time now. Additionally, I don’t believe Murdoch has ever complained about this particular issue, nor do I feel he is sufficiently educated on the finer nuances of SEO and search engine spiders to make this level of complaint. (See Google announcement at http://googlenewsblog.blogspot.com/2009/12/same-protocol-more-options-for-news.html)

2. First Click Free
• Google announced greater flexibility to the “First Click Free” program. If you aren’t familiar with the program, “First Click Free” was designed by Google to address situations where important content is not publicly available. The goal of the program is to include highly relevant content in Google’s search index and provide a promotion and discovery opportunity for publishers with restricted content. (For more information, visit http://googlewebmastercentral.blogspot.com/2008/10/first-click-free-for-web-search.html.) The issue with this program is that users finding restricted content on Google search results can view the content without paying or registering with the site where the content is posted. For example, if a user wanted to view an article on the Wall Street Journal’s website (that would normally require a registration/payment), they could simply search for the headline in Google, find the result, and click through to see the content in its entirety for free, and without a registration. This used to be an unlimited program. Google has since added greater flexibility to the program. For example, Google now allows for snippets of the article to be displayed, and for a restriction on the number of ‘free views’ a user can have until the pay/registration wall appears even on the ‘first click’ from Google.
•
Now, is this a response to Murdoch like Forbes implies (see http://www.forbes.com/2009/12/02/rupert-murdoch-publishers-technology-internet-google.html)? Google is saying it isn’t . . . I question that. This would be a relatively easy change to make and would give Murdoch ‘an escape’ if he wanted to back off the war he is waging against Google and still ‘save face’. Under the new program, Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal could wall off content to users that want to view more than a certain number of pages on their site per day versus a certain number of pages on their site per session/visit. (See Google announcement at http://googlenewsblog.blogspot.com/2009/12/update-to-first-click-free.html)

Again, don’t hesitate to email me directly with any questions that you may have on this issue.

NOTE: Tribune Company and its officers may feel differently than the views expressed above. My current role within Tribune Company is to acquire as much profitable traffic from search engines as possible. It is possible that Tribune Company may choose an entirely different direction in regards to search engines that I am not currently aware of.

I speak on behalf of myself with the above opinions and, while they are the opinions shared to Tribune Company staff in my official capacity as the Director of SEO at Tribune, they still remain my personal opinions.

Brent D. Payne
Director, Search Engine Optimization
Tribune Interactive