Murdoch admits News Corp buying MySpace was a "huge mistake"

This story qualifies as a "Captain Obvious" moment for a lot of people. Rupert Murdoch, the head of News Corporation, told the company's shareholders at a meeting on Friday that buying MySpace was a "huge mistake". AFP (via Google) reports that Murdock also admitted that News Corp "proceeded to mismanage it in every possible way."

In hindsight, MySpace was pretty much doomed from the start. Sure, it had a huge user base of people at one point but the user interface and terrible design choices for the social networking site left a lot to be desired. That's where Facebook came in with its clean and clear design and its much more manageable user interface that made it easier and more fun to use than MySpace.

Murdock, who has a lot of things on his mind lately (you may have heard something about phone hacking in the last couple of months) said that after News Corp paid $580 million to purchase MySpace in 2005, "We could have sold it for $6 billion a month later." We highly doubt that he would be able to get that much of a profit but there's no doubt at all that News Corp basically let MySpace flap in the wind with little to no effort to improve the site until it was far too late.

Now, singer Justin Timberlake and Specific Media are the proud owners of MySpace after purchasing the site earlier this year for $35 million. The new owners still haven't gone into detail about what they plan to do with the site, which quite frankly doesn't bode well. Perhaps the MySpace brand should just go away.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Apple is killing the traditional PC faster than you think

Next Story

More evidence of Apple television project surfaces

18 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Gaffney said,
Murdoch shouldn't have been allowed to take over Myspace, he already controlled to much information.

And still does, more`s the pity!

This was one site I had totally blocked because of all the malware and virus that came from there. It was a minefield IMO.

Lets take a look at how happy he was when he purchased the annoying "****" myspace was.

"Mr Murdoch says the networking site will drive traffic to his Fox TV sites." <-- look what type of Idiots watch fox news! LOL

ALSO -- not the first mistake into the internet world

Deja vu?

Cynics may charge that Mr Murdoch has been here before.

In 1999, another keynote speech laid out lofty ambitions for News Corp online - only for several well-financed operations to close down within months of their launch.


Young people don't want to rely on a God-like figure from above to tell them what's important
Rupert Murdoch
Before that came failed initiatives such as Delphi Internet in the mid-1990s, an online service which mingled News Corp's UK content with US material and failed to capture anyone's imagination, and an abortive internet service provider experiment called LineOne.

mirx said,
John - with all due respect, I believe his name is Rupert Murdoch (not Murdock).

Then press "Report a Problem with the Article" and say that.

mirx said,
John - with all due respect, I believe his name is Rupert Murdoch (not Murdock).

That's a normal journalistic practice, I mean, it would be weird if they kept referring to his full name.

Uhyve said,

That's a normal journalistic practice, I mean, it would be weird if they kept referring to his full name.

MurdocK isn't his last name, MurdocH is the right one.

There was nothing worse than visiting someones MySpace and waiting like an hour for all the crap, i mean content, to load up!!

bbfc_uk said,
There was nothing worse than visiting someones MySpace and waiting like an hour for all the crap, i mean content, to load up!!

Agreed. And then being scared to death when their music started blasting at full volume...

I don't see why they didn't take the 6 Billion in the first place, I mean that's 5.5 billion dollars profit in a month why not take it and not have to work to improve it? Or in their case ignore it and let it die.

De.Bug said,
I don't see why they didn't take the 6 Billion in the first place, I mean that's 5.5 billion dollars profit in a month why not take it and not have to work to improve it? Or in their case ignore it and let it die.

+1 can't beat that return...

De.Bug said,
Or in their case ignore it and let it die.

This is what did them in. They decided to plaster everything with ads and didn't add any good features. Perfect example of how poor management can destroy a site.

Did anyone else die a little when they saw Tom Anderson (former Myspace owner and spokesman) raving about Facebook (on his own Facebook) during their big press conference a month ago?