| 10:43 pm on Oct 20, 2012 (gmt 0)|
Every one is getting more professional in how they view their web presence, less likely to accept airey fairy promises , and propositions that don't add up economically
| 10:48 pm on Oct 20, 2012 (gmt 0)|
You cannot blame the newspapers though. Google should remain as a search engine, not an imformation engine.
| 11:23 pm on Oct 20, 2012 (gmt 0)|
Actually Its great !
They did a experiment from which they quantified the pros and cons, nice one
| 11:58 pm on Oct 20, 2012 (gmt 0)|
|Google should remain as a search engine, not an imformation engine. |
It makes no difference because as both a search or information engine, they get first crack at ad dollars being spent on their face time with the visitor, not the newspaper. I've said many times before that this is why webmasters don't want cache, site previews, none of that junk because it gives Google more visitor and ad revenue opportunities and takes away from the webmaster. This is why NOARCHIVE should be SOP procedure for all websites to stop this practice but many webmasters idiotically defend their use of cache pages. Besides, Bing and Yahoo are also making the information play and Google has to do it to remain competitive.
However, people want a one-stop shop to find all their news and it's driven by customer demand. I like to see all my news sources at a glance, not going to each site one at a time. If the newspapers can't figure out how to get some revenue share out of that then too bad for them.
| 12:41 am on Oct 21, 2012 (gmt 0)|
I don't just mean this, but Google in general. They have taken away visitors from different sectors, translate, dictionaries etc.
| 1:19 am on Oct 21, 2012 (gmt 0)|
|This is why NOARCHIVE should be SOP procedure for all websites to stop this practice |
If everyone said "noarchive" then g### would simply stop honoring the directive. Same thing with "expires" headers. They're just sending information to the browser. The browser-- which for these purposes includes the googlebot-- can choose how to act on the information.
| 4:25 am on Oct 21, 2012 (gmt 0)|
|If everyone said "noarchive" then g### would simply stop honoring the directive |
I don't think so -- if they ignored a hardcoded directive to "not archive content", and ignored it, they would open themselves up to lawsuits, (probably a giant class action).
| 6:27 am on Oct 22, 2012 (gmt 0)|
The problem newspapers (globally, I have no idea whether Brazilian papers are better or worse) have is that a high proportion of news is available from multiple sources. If the newspapers pull out of Google News, other sources will replace them, or new sources will appear to fill in the gap.
| 1:07 pm on Oct 22, 2012 (gmt 0)|
It looks like the French are going to do a similar thing to Germany...