<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Blogs and investigative journalism: publishing</title>
	<atom:link href="http://onlinejournalismblog.com/2007/10/30/blogs-and-investigative-journalism-publishing/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://onlinejournalismblog.com/2007/10/30/blogs-and-investigative-journalism-publishing/</link>
	<description>A conversation.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Feb 2012 08:45:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Bradshaw</title>
		<link>http://onlinejournalismblog.com/2007/10/30/blogs-and-investigative-journalism-publishing/#comment-3241</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Bradshaw</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Dec 2007 10:21:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onlinejournalismblog.com/2007/10/30/blogs-and-investigative-journalism-publishing/#comment-3241</guid>
		<description>Thanks - I&#039;ve asked it to be amended slightly (as per strikethrough above), though I feel the security criticism stands.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks &#8211; I&#8217;ve asked it to be amended slightly (as per strikethrough above), though I feel the security criticism stands.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Julian</title>
		<link>http://onlinejournalismblog.com/2007/10/30/blogs-and-investigative-journalism-publishing/#comment-3243</link>
		<dc:creator>Julian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 01 Dec 2007 13:02:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onlinejournalismblog.com/2007/10/30/blogs-and-investigative-journalism-publishing/#comment-3243</guid>
		<description>The negative comments on wikileaks are completely out of proportion as a reflection of what is actually said in the journalism community about this site. Further, the &quot;looting of kenya&quot; story has not been questioned by any but a couple of corrupt politicians in kenya who were the subject of the revelations. Please rectify this with a more balanced overview that reflects the real proportion of journalistic sentiment rather than reporting artificial controversy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The negative comments on wikileaks are completely out of proportion as a reflection of what is actually said in the journalism community about this site. Further, the &#8220;looting of kenya&#8221; story has not been questioned by any but a couple of corrupt politicians in kenya who were the subject of the revelations. Please rectify this with a more balanced overview that reflects the real proportion of journalistic sentiment rather than reporting artificial controversy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Digestivo &#124; [ fractura.net ]</title>
		<link>http://onlinejournalismblog.com/2007/10/30/blogs-and-investigative-journalism-publishing/#comment-3242</link>
		<dc:creator>Digestivo &#124; [ fractura.net ]</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2007 22:55:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://onlinejournalismblog.com/2007/10/30/blogs-and-investigative-journalism-publishing/#comment-3242</guid>
		<description>[...] blogosférico, em vez de andar a jogar à credibilidade, tentar aprender alguma coisa acerca dos novos métodos de publicação? Alguns  crêem que sim, que pelo menos muito do jornalismo cidadão necessita de algum [...] </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] blogosférico, em vez de andar a jogar à credibilidade, tentar aprender alguma coisa acerca dos novos métodos de publicação? Alguns  crêem que sim, que pelo menos muito do jornalismo cidadão necessita de algum [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

