Anderson’s Free and the News Industry (5): Google

Image via CrunchBase

In a series of seven blogposts, we try to build further upon Chris
Anderson’s ideas on the Free business model. Not as a review, critique
or praise for Anderson’s book, but to find out if his thoughts could
also help the news industry. In this fifth post we take a look at Chris Anderson’s views on Google’s concerns.

After what we’ve said about Google’s enormous power as a
newsaggregator and about the reasons why publishers are totally
unhappy with that situation, it comes somewhat as a surprise to hear
Chris Anderson talk about Google’s worries. Still, they are real. To
be precise, Google’s biggest fear, according to Anderson, is for the
newspapers to dry up. That’s not very hard to imagine for someone used
to working with Google News: without any sources, without any links,
there wouldn’t be any Google News.

Of course we’re not that far yet. Even with the newspapersbusiness in
big trouble, and even with one newspaper falling after anouther,
Google still has tens of links with every news item. But that doesn’t
mean there is no problem. With every dying newspaper, especially on a
regional level, Google will have a harder time indexing the importance
of the local topics. Sure, there’s the new weblogs but for Google
they’re not all as trustworthy and stable as the newspapers are – or
used to be. Anderson is certain that in the long run this will be okay
again, but the short term effects are not te be neglected. If “free”
demonetizes industries before new business models can bring back the
money, then everybody loses, he stresses. Not without reason, that is.

If you would ask the newspaper publishers for a solution, they would
come up with one immediately: just stop Google News and we’ll be
automatically back in business. Yeah right, dream on. Such a solution
would not only show signs of being shortsighted, it would also cover
the real problem. If Google News stops (which it doesn’t, of course),
then the next aggregator would be in the #1 position and we could
start over again. And again. And again. But moreover, the real problem
for the newspaper industry is not aggregators like Google News. It is
being unable to adapt properly to the new era. Which is something they
have to cope with themselves, not blaming Google or the internet or
whatever.

Yes, the situation has changed. Like Wikipedia took away the business
of Encyclopedia Britannica, the news aggregators and sites like
Craigslist changed everything for newspapers. Wealth is being
relocated and sometimes even vanishes all together. As always, the old
world is less likely (and able) to adapt to the changing circumstances
than new competitors are. They have the burden of the old business,
with all of its old habits and old rules. Still making money, although
far less than before, still convinced that the ways they operated
decades ago didn’t bring them an accidental success and therefore the
old business is not likely to be stopped overnight. Yesterday’s
success is the most important reason that the adaptation to new
habits, rules and businesses is terribly difficult. If not impossible.
To most, that is.

Tomorrow we take a look at Anderson’s views on the distinction between
professionals and amateurs.

Read all the other articles in this series