On Tuesday his lieutenant, Peter Chernin, began to make threatening noises about the way Myspace users are allowed to import feeds from other sites, such as YouTube and Flickr, thereby driving web traffic their way. 'Almost all of them are really driven off the back of Myspace,' he said. 'There's no reason why we can't build a parallel business. Given that most of their traffic comes from us, if we build adequate, if not superior, competitors, I think we ought to be able to match them, if not exceed them.'
If you wanted a statement encapsulating why Big Media still doesn't understand the internet, you couldn't do better than that. The lesson of Web 2.0 is that the whole (of a number of independent, autonomous services) winds up being greater than the sum of its parts. If Murdoch fails to get this, Myspace will wither before his eyes.
2 schools of thought here:
1 - Companies such as YouTube and Flickr need to be paying MySpace for the 'free exposure' that they are getting on the social-networking site, and for all the traffic that MySpace is sending their way. If they won't, MySpace needs to ban their feeds and create their own version of the services.
2 - By allowing users to add YouTube and Flickr feeds to their MySpace pages, you are creating a more enjoyable experience for them on MySpace, which means they will be more likely to stay longer, and to tell others to check out the site.
Again, do you put the wants and needs of the customer first, or your own? Will you make more money by attempting to control your customers, or by attempting to empower them to create and enjoy their own experience?
Pic via Flickr user Grace :)