We have already had this discussion in the other thread you started. I gave you several sources that describe it in terms of exclusive use, not some anti-Google conspiracy.
As you have eloquently pointed out, it is both easy and the webmaster's right to block Google. It is also the publisher's right to negotiate use of and compensation for their intellectual property.
No harm, no foul. It is business as it has been done for a couple of hundred years now.
My web already operates like cable TV. I pay my ISP (who also happens to provide cable TV) for general access. There are large areas of the web that I can only access by paying additional fees - should I so desire - although not to the ISP (so I guess, once again, your analogy begins to break down).
I remain baffled as to why you see this as anti-competitive collusion by a bunch of Luddite conspirators. A week ago you were saying that Murdoch would never block Google because of the loss of traffic. It appears that he is serious, and has been for long enough that he has developed alternate sources of income.