Everyone knows the Murdoch against Google case that is still running thought the news all around the world.
I'm not interested in the reason and all the background that is behind it, I just want tell my way of browsing news.
I do usually follow, via feeds in Google reader, a couple of newspaper, many blogs, many tech sites, and some Google News topic-oriented aggregate. Most of time i just read the headlines, but i do read the full article of at least 5% of the news I do have on the reader.
Sometime it happened that thought the feeds of Google News (i do not use google news directly only its feeds) I reach some article of the Wall Street Journal or other news sites of the Murdoch "news corporation". I have to admit that I do not usually follow any of those news papers, but when I reach them thought my feed I do generate traffic anyway and consequently ads-provided revenue for them.
I don't think that I am the only one that have this way of reading news I'm sure that there are many user that do the same, so the sum of all of us generates a lot of traffic and ads-revenues for those sites.
If they believe that the ads provided on a single article cannot pay the cost of provide that article to a "one-time reader" why they do provide tools for linking their news on blogs and links sharing websites at the bottom of each article? Isn't Google News doing just what those tools allows to any other user?
In the end if those newspapers will be removed from Google and all It's services, the only effects for me will be that I would not be able to reach them anymore, so they will lose "my traffic".
This sound like a restaurant that allows only local customer and forbid access to tourists.
Cya
