Rupert Murdoch Lashes Out Bizarrely Against The White House For Asking Congress Not To Break The Internet
from the get-your-stories-straight dept
While the lobbyists favoring SOPA/PIPA have decided that the talking point on the White House's statement opposing SOPA/PIPA as written really means that the bills, as they are, are great, it appears that no one sent Rupert Murdoch the talking points. Murdoch, who has been personally lobbying Congress in support of the bills, took to his relatively new Twitter account to lash out at the President:So Obama has thrown in his lot withSilicon Valley paymasters who threaten allsoftware creators with piracy, plain thievery. -
— Rupert Murdoch(@rupertmurdoch) January 14, 2012
Piracy leader is Google who streams movies free, sells advts around them.No wonder pouring millions into lobbying.
— Rupert Murdoch(@rupertmurdoch) January 14, 2012
Film making risky as hell. This has to lead to less, hurting writers, actors, all concerned.
— Rupert Murdoch(@rupertmurdoch) January 14, 2012
Next, when it comes to streaming films, it's true that Google puts advertising around certain videos on YouTube. However, it's not all videos, and their system (quite famously) allows the actual copyright holder to make the money from those ads, leading to a rather lucrative new revenue stream for many content creators. Furthermore, for years, people have mocked YouTube for losing a ton of money, so it's not like this is a particularly lucrative part of Google's business. As for filmmaking being "risky as hell," so what? Lots of things are risky, but most of us don't think that the government should censor free speech, break internet security and create massive undue litigation... just to make Rupert's investments less risky. That he seems to think that's a reasonable tradeoff shows just how Rupert Murdoch views the government: as a tool to funnel extra money to himself. Furthermore, his claims that it will lead to "less" are just laughable as well. The number of movies made per year has more than tripled in the past fifteen years, just as online piracy ramped up. Also, Nigeria, China and India -- three countries known to have more infringement than the US -- all built up huge film businesses over the last few years, despite all the infringement.
After thinking about it for a few hours, Murdoch went right back to it:
Seems like universal anger with Optus from all sorts of normal supporters.Maybe backing pirates a rare miscalculation by friend Axelrod.
— Rupert Murdoch(@rupertmurdoch) January 16, 2012
More pirates.Whole entertainment ind employs 2.2 million ave salary 65 g. Good jobs and expanding foreign earnings. Made in America, too!
— Rupert Murdoch(@rupertmurdoch) January 16, 2012
As was highlighted in an excellent report by Zach Carter just last month, the 2.2 million jobs number is complete bunk:
[The] 2.2 million jobs figure, however, exaggerates Hollywood's contribution to the American economy. According to supplemental data provided to HuffPost by MPAA, only 272,000 people work for movie studios and television companies. The lobby group claims that an additional 430,000 people work in related "distribution" jobs dependent on Hollywood, legal web streamers like Netflix, the few remaining video store clerks and cashiers checking out DVD purchases.Yeah. 1.6 million of those jobs are not actually in the entertainment industry at all. Rupe, before you tweet, perhaps try learning the details of the "facts" you're about to spew so you look a little less ridiculous next time.
But the vast majority of the jobs Dodd & Co. claim are threatened by online piracy are only peripherally related to the entertainment business. MPAA takes credit for nearly 1.6 million jobs at florists, catering companies, hardware stores and other industries that work with major movie studios, assuming that these jobs could not ultimately be out of a job without Hollywood help.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: pipa, protect ip, rupert murdoch, sopa, the white house
Companies: news corp.
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Investigate this ASS !
And I will reply to his tweeting and all should do the same.
Go To The Hell you deserve Rupert.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Schadenfreude pie, anyone?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mike, if you want him to learn anything just leave the info on the the voicemail of a recent murder victim or famous criminal suspect. That's how he gets all his news.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Redditors
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Redditors
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Redditors
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Redditors
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Redditors
"Please sir, may I have some more? I swear I'll impugn Google for you on ten more blogs!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Redditors
Damn right, Masnick show a list of senators and congressmen that you employ or admit that you contribute nothing to meaningful employment.
Show how much money you give to the MPAA or admit that you have no connection to producing original content.
Show how many jobs you've outsourced from the U.S. or admit that you make no contribution to the U.S. economy.
Time to replace the freetard term with plain ol' Mike and his the alternative to more copyright enforcement is more jobs and business, magically bigger on the inside tardi supporters, now known as tardises.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Redditors
Well, it's said that once you reach a determined age your brain only loses neurons daily so I'm sorry for you. You can't grow brains to try and understand what's happening therefore your only option seems to be death and oblivion. Good riddance I say. Keep trolling, it's amusing ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Redditors
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Redditors
yeah, user generated content is a scam. yeah, millions of us perform free and unpaid labor on behalf of the oligarchs who control facebook, google, and so on...
it's still no reason to side in favor of SOPA/PIPA. piracy doesn't hurt artists - the media industry does.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Redditors
You're a sad human being if the reward for that labour has to be measured in dollar amounts and nothing else. Still, nice of you to come here and put in the work free of charge anyway.
"piracy doesn't hurt artists - the media industry does."
This, however, I can't argue with.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That's why we must fight to continue to employ the displaced veterans of the horse and buggy industry.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
People didn't want the horse and buggy anymore. However they mega-want movies, games and music.
So, now you're also a total failure at coming up with analogies. Nice job.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
But, people wanted transportation. Just not in same the way that the horse traders and buggy manufacturers wanted to provide it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Is this like yesterday's post where I paraphrased a congressman informing you of itunes and amazon and inquiring whether or not you were retarded?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I quoted your statement and rebutted. What are you babbling about?
The horse and buggy analogy, although not completely correct, is analogous to piracy whether you like it or not.
Is this like yesterday's post where I paraphrased a congressman informing you of itunes and amazon and inquiring whether or not you were retarded?
Since I didn't post any comments yesterday - I really, really don't know what you are babbling on about here either.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
MODE of transportation = MEDIUM of content delivery.
Car, plane = streaming, digital files, CDs
horse + buggy = wax cylinder, 78s, 8 -track.
Now stop being a fucking dunce.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
We have to get rid of boats!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
MODE of transportation = MEDIUM of content delivery.
Car, plane = streaming, digital files, CDs
horse + buggy = wax cylinder, 78s, 8 -track.
Since this is the argument I was making, I am not sure what your point is.
People still wanted transportation, just not the kind the horse traders and buggy manufactures wanted to provide.
People still want content, but they want it in the formats and quality they desire, they want to purchase it once and use it on any and all of their devices, they don't want DRM and they don't want artificial release windows. The legacy gatekeepers don't want to provide any of that because it involves giving up control to some degree. If your customer is under served, they will find another means.
Now stop being a fucking dunce.
Whatever dude. Doesn't seem like it's me who not grasping simple concepts here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
WHERE IS YOUR LOBBY NOW?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
So who is failing at analogies?
They don't want what you think they want.
They mega want easily, globally available content at a price consumers are willing to py with no restrictions. Its not about the movies games or music anymore. Nice job.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
or
funny?
insightful?
or
funny?
insightful?
or
funny?
insightful?
or
funny?
insightful?
or
funny?
insightful?
or
funny?
I give up marking both.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
People don't want the horse and buggy anymore. They don't want the MAFIAA's outdated method of control either.
So, now you're also in denial of, on top of a total failure when it comes to understanding, the accuracy of the analogy. Nice job.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I'm quite sure that the mega-wanters could give a hoot if your business, and all that it has to offer, dropped dead today. You honestly believe that the world wouldn't step up and bridge that pitifully narrow gap? Do you?
You seem to espouse creativity via your offerings yet you can't poke your business plan out of a wet paper bag? Pathetic really, truly pathetic.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Is my math right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Is my math right?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
of course, this is the same Rupert Murdock whose companies have been found hacking into phones in England. (So far.)
But at least he's proven that he's more tech savvy than most congresscritters. He knows how to use Twitter!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Murdoch is Robber Baron!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Murdoch is Robber Baron!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Murdoch is Robber Baron!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Murdoch's China news company has gotten itself into trouble multiple times with the Chinese government for publishing stories their government didn't like. I read that Murdoch has already gotten so frustrated with the Chinese government's interference (and how his news company in China is still losing money and heavily lags behind China's state run news channels) that he's even considered bailing on his Chinese news company, because it's just too much of a hassle dealing with Chinese censorship at times.
So if China's censorship has been such hell for Murdoch, and gotten his company in trouble with the government multiple times (included threats of revoking their media license) then why does he think it's a good idea to throw the same kind of censorship in place in America, where he already has the top news station (Fox News) and other top papers (like The Wall Street Journal)?
If anything Murdoch should be fighting to keep the status quo the same in the US, no matter how much piracy he's suffering, he's still winning in US media markets. Introduce the uncertainty of censorship on the Internet and you might lose the top spot if competitors learn to work under the new rules better then you. Or worse yet, with government censorship the government might decide to shut you down or start censoring a lot of your stories, which will give Murdoch even more hell then he's experiencing in China right now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rupert the Grouper
www.youtube.com/watch?v=UMEcsBLr8OE
For some reason I think it applies to our dear Rupe and his mumbling... Ok, off to read the rest.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jobs?
He never seemeed to be that bothered about jobs when he was slahing employment at his newspapers.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Jobs?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Paymasters
Let us not forget that the RIAA/MPAA pumped over $80 million lobbying money into Congress last year... their highest ever.
Obama and Biden have not yet had their meeting with the Tech Industry but some funds to protect the freedom of the Internet is not such a bad idea.
It also seems that Rabid Maddog (as I call him) ignores the vast Internet opposition. Yes here we are Rupert. *>WAVE
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dear Rupert Murdoch
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Can he ask for his money back?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Murdoch is a dangerous fool
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yeah! The only thing he should historically be in favor of is hacking the phones of dead little girls!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There's a word for expecting filmmaking not to be risky
If you make something artistic, great.
If you expect it to be vastly profitable, then good luck.
But there is no guarantee it will be vastly profitable. Trying to anticipate what the public will like is inherently risky. There should be no guarantee that they will pay whatever you want.
If I hear that a certain movie sucks, then I might be willing to see it at a lower price. Or not at all. If you don't want to charge what people are willing to pay, then tough luck that they didn't buy it.
Oh, sorry. The MPAA doesn't want to fix their problems. They just want to whine about piracy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Evidence backing up his argument
Out of curiosity I did a Google search (in a "clean" browser with no account logged in), and the top results are the official site, IMDB entries for the various films, Wikipedia pages, reviews and links to the trailers on YouTube. You have to get halfway down the second page to find a link to a search page on IsoHunt, and the next "pirate" link is to tPB on page 10.
Now, I'm assuming by "free links" he means somewhere to download the film without paying (rather than a link you don't have to pay to click on - possibly a poor choice of words - although maybe he does think that all sites should be behind paywalls like the Times's), which suggests either he thinks IMDB/Wikipedia/Review sites are actually offering the film, he thinks his company's own trailers on YouTube (where Google kindly hosts them for free) are piratical, or he uses Google so often to find free downloads that it has personalised his search page.
So, he doesn't know what he's talking about or he's a hypocrite (or both). Sounds about right, as far as Murdoch and the Internet go...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Evidence backing up his argument
I find it perfectly believable that he think every "hit" on teh Googles is for a pirated copy of the film.
Or maybe hes stupid like that Canadian Band Manager who claimed the band had gone Gold from pirates stealing their work, because of the fake search results some engines use.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Evidence backing up his argument
Oooh, he searched for something on the internet and was able to find what he was looking for. The gall of Google! Making a tool that actually works! Pure Evil I tell you!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Evidence backing up his argument
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Evidence backing up his argument
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Let's try a thought experiment
Imagine, just for a moment, that SOPA / PIPA are enacted into law.
The MPAA / RIAA starts shutting down innocent non infringing material worldwide. Either (1) as collateral damage (using a nuclear weapon to kill an ant) or (2) because the site is innocent (using a nuclear weapon to kill an innocent party that never was engaged in piracy).
Start putting people in jail. Extradite foreigners. Throw away the key. Label them as terrorists. Censor 'rogue' websites like YouTube or even TechDirt. Yeah, that's the ticket.
Okay?
Now a question.
What do you think will happen?
(A) Piracy will completely stop.
(B) Piracy will decrease.
(C) Piracy will stay about the same.
(D) Piracy will go deep underground and increase wildly.
(And no fair asking foreign dictators how trying to crush uprisings is working out. Keep your eyes on your own paper.)
Okay. You can wake up from this nightmare now.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Universal Anger
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Universal Anger
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rupert is right!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
-Sent from my iPad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A Modest Proposal
Use these blackouts as an example for your own protest, and take a year off of doing any work to foster "content creation", and any of the other things that you do, so that the citizens of the United States can make an informed decision about how necessary SOPA and PIPA are. I am certain that no movies will be created, and absolutely no new music will be recorded without you. That'll teach us to not like your proposed legislation.
/s
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Salaries
This is a really weird figure. If Hollywood is including the florists, catering companies, etc. in their "2.2 million" figure, then the "ave salary" sure as hell wouldn't be "65 g."
However, it's suspiciously close to the median income for producers and directors, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Of course, there are only 98,600 producers and directors employed in the entire country.
Incidentally, even if he did include the music industry (he did say "whole entertainment ind" after all), that would actually bring the "ave salary" down. The median annual salary of music directors and composers is $41,270, again according to the BLS. And, of course, there are only 53,600 directors and composers employed in the entire country.
...Separately, Google responded to Murdoch's tweets, accurately calling them "nonsense:"
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31001_3-57359506-261/google-calls-murdochs-piracy-allegations -nonsense/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Salaries
Murdoc states this as good jobs... I personally think of a "good job" as something that makes more than the average, not 5 or possibly even more than the average.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
FTFY
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
SOPA will pass Obama wants election jobs
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Crazy Old Man
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The only people who would complain about filmmaking being "risky" are people who want to spend their entire career churning out sequels, remakes, and sequels to remakes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Now we know where his newspapers get their fact checking skills.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Murdoch is a bum
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I love the bitches whining above !
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I love the bitches whining above !
Drugs are next!
Was a waste of time and money anyway trying to enforce those laws.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Google vs. Content – Why Rupert Is Right!
http://www.themusicvoid.com/2012/01/google-vs-content-why-rupert-is-right/
Finishes article off with:
"Be Sociable, Share!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hypocrisy at its greatest!
Lets see.. Its okay to tap into a phone system and listen into private conversations. But, Google placing ads around questionable copyright material!!! THAT IS AN OUTRAGE.
OMG, how did this chump become so wealthy? He must have inherited it all.
Gee, thank you Mr. Murdoch for the lecture. Because your moral compass is far superior to GOOGLE!! LAWL!!!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Murdoch Tweeting ?
The whole operation of transnational media needs to be looked at. Just look at the sort of influence Murdoch has had in Britian until they went to far. The whole Murdoch business needs to be looked at. Democracy depends on independent media.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]