Re:Google may shut down its news service in Europe
by knorker on Wednesday November 21, 2018 @11:44AM
(#18503935)
I obviously don't have all the data about why Google is or isn't shutting Google News down.
But given that we are in 2018, not right after 2001-09-11 as when it was created, even if Google News doesn't add anything positive to Google's bottom line or PR (big, BIG "if") there's a huge cost to shutting it down to Google PR, since it's another example of Google shutting a popular product.
If the EU is doing this, it actually gives Google an excuse, in case they wanted to shut it down anyway. And nobody else would make a replacement because it's just not economical.
Yes. I agree that "being logged in while browsing the Internet" has value to Google.
You may disagree on what that value is. I may be way off, but it's a Fermi estimate. I encourage you to plug in the numbers you would estimate, and see what monetary value Google News has to Google, and see if a link tax with amounts that news sites would actually care about makes economic sense.
> That's a bit of mental gymnastics here.
I agree. It's more a counter-point to "obviously Google should pay" than a suggestion for a better model.
> Nobody is giving anybody a freebie here.
On this we agree. Both supply-side parties add value, and all three parties gain value. To say that one of the parties is a "leech" is not accurate.
If the EU forces Google to pay a meaningful fee to news sites, then that may (in my estimate: extremely likely to) completely erase any benefits, and it'd be rational for Google to bug out.
But given that we are in 2018, not right after 2001-09-11 as when it was created, even if Google News doesn't add anything positive to Google's bottom line or PR (big, BIG "if") there's a huge cost to shutting it down to Google PR, since it's another example of Google shutting a popular product.
If the EU is doing this, it actually gives Google an excuse, in case they wanted to shut it down anyway. And nobody else would make a replacement because it's just not economical.
Yes. I agree that "being logged in while browsing the Internet" has value to Google.
You may disagree on what that value is. I may be way off, but it's a Fermi estimate. I encourage you to plug in the numbers you would estimate, and see what monetary value Google News has to Google, and see if a link tax with amounts that news sites would actually care about makes economic sense.
> That's a bit of mental gymnastics here.
I agree. It's more a counter-point to "obviously Google should pay" than a suggestion for a better model.
> Nobody is giving anybody a freebie here.
On this we agree. Both supply-side parties add value, and all three parties gain value. To say that one of the parties is a "leech" is not accurate.
If the EU forces Google to pay a meaningful fee to news sites, then that may (in my estimate: extremely likely to) completely erase any benefits, and it'd be rational for Google to bug out.