How to misunderstand the interwebz...

Sometimes big companies puzzle me.

There's this internet thing, yeah? It works pretty well. Stuff is easily available - you go, click, read/listen/watch and then go someplace else. Fine.

Now, what happens when you run across a site that requires you to log on? If it's offering something unique or interesting then maybe you might bother to register and put up with their spam.

But what happens if you have to pay to get that content?

I dunno, maybe I'm just cheap, but I reckon that 99% of the time I go someplace else. Particularly if it's something, like the news, that I can get free just as easily and just as good.

So, maybe someone might want to explain that to Rupert Murdoch - obsessed as he seems to be with making money from the internet (other than the advertising space he can sell). Seems like access to all the Murdoch press (the Times, Sun etc...) will be restricted to those who are willing to pay for it.

Stupidity.

It's not as if news and comment isn't a plentiful resource on the interwbez, what with all those bloggers and so on who seem happy to comment on just about anything (cough). Or as if there aren't plenty of competitors out there who will give you the news for free - let me think, oh yeah, there's that BBC thing.

Here's the thing: the internet works best when it's free. Make your money from adverts or some sort of premium content (in the Murdoch press? - yeah, OK...), but if you don't let me in to get the basics then I am going somewhere else.