The Future of the Complicated Series of Tubes We know as the Internet

I have something to say. Something specific! Without stopping to think of a topic!

In the news, I came across this article.

It's about Rupert Murdoch, and his plans for the future of the internet we all know and love.

Here's a sentence from the article which pretty much sums it up:

"He is planning to make newspapers like The Times and Sunday Times chargeable online."

So now on to my haiku:

Murdoch's use of
The internet really must
Not be extensive


First of all, take a look a the handsome feller here:

http://lanceturner.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/rupert_murdoch.jpg

There you go. Now with that image in mind, here he is, planning to make the New York Times Online and such chargeable (to clarify, he does not own the NYTimes, so he's merely speaking about his plans for world domination starting with the highly successful newspaper industry). Let me think of what this reminds me of... perhaps actual newspapers today? Well, those are doing absolutely great, right? I can imagine that applying the principles that are causing physical newspapers' downfalls will do wonders for the online market... in opposite land.

It's a good think that the NYTimes has a monopoly on online news, or else they would just completely fall into oblivion. Wait a minute? What's that you say? There are other places to get news? Google? Wikipedia? CNN? Yahoo? AOL? BBC? MSN? ABC? FOX? NBC? Bing? Ask.com? Twitter? Facebook? MySpace? Boston Globe? LATimes? Chicago Tribute? Or almost any site one could find with a quick Google search (or already set as one's homepage)? Wow, who knew.

So, let's think about this for a minute. Murdoch's strategy for one of a thousand different free news sites (which, might I add, is not even one of the most popular) is to make its users PAY for content they can find anywhere else for free? Which begs my earlier question:

Has Rupert Murdoch used the internet before?