<?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/"
	xmlns:creativeCommons="http://backend.userland.com/creativeCommonsRssModule"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Independent voices</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/01/02/independent-voices/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/01/02/independent-voices/</link>
	<description>Same old blog, brand new place</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Dec 2009 20:29:45 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Third Runway at Demotix &#171; Imagine ..</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/01/02/independent-voices/comment-page-1/#comment-120095</link>
		<dc:creator>Third Runway at Demotix &#171; Imagine ..</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 11:50:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/01/02/independent-voices/#comment-120095</guid>
		<description>[...] is a new, independent global photo-agency. An article, written by Doc Searls, on Independent voices, includes Demotix as part of this opening of social [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] is a new, independent global photo-agency. An article, written by Doc Searls, on Independent voices, includes Demotix as part of this opening of social [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Doc Searls</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/01/02/independent-voices/comment-page-1/#comment-116682</link>
		<dc:creator>Doc Searls</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Jan 2009 18:01:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/01/02/independent-voices/#comment-116682</guid>
		<description>Thanks, Steve. 

I acknowledge the inherent worth of newspapers, and one of their most neglected weapons against opinion blogs currently dominating Google News (and much else), in my &lt;a href=&quot;http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/01/03/op-ed-vs-ed/&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;latest post&lt;/a&gt;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, Steve. </p>
<p>I acknowledge the inherent worth of newspapers, and one of their most neglected weapons against opinion blogs currently dominating Google News (and much else), in my <a href="http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/01/03/op-ed-vs-ed/" rel="nofollow">latest post</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Stephen Lewis</title>
		<link>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/01/02/independent-voices/comment-page-1/#comment-116677</link>
		<dc:creator>Stephen Lewis</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Jan 2009 17:51:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/doc/2009/01/02/independent-voices/#comment-116677</guid>
		<description>D.  Even as the old-fashioned business model of old media collapses, a case can be made for the inherent worth of newspapers as they once were and have evolved to be.  It might be that the new media is but a superstructure built atop the information and competences of the old. For a far better take on this than I can compose, see http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2008/12/22/081222ta_talk_surowiecki . Surowiecki also advances new financial models on which to build &quot;newspapers&quot;.  So, lets not let the baby go with the bathwater.  Newspapers still give us a &quot;product&quot; that almost no bloggers have the time, competences, and staff to delivery and most bloggers blog about the news they receive from newspapers.  Even Dave Winer&#039;s excellent &quot;river&quot;  you recommended in a past post streams the NYT and the BBC. SL</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>D.  Even as the old-fashioned business model of old media collapses, a case can be made for the inherent worth of newspapers as they once were and have evolved to be.  It might be that the new media is but a superstructure built atop the information and competences of the old. For a far better take on this than I can compose, see <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2008/12/22/081222ta_talk_surowiecki" rel="nofollow">http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2008/12/22/081222ta_talk_surowiecki</a> . Surowiecki also advances new financial models on which to build &#8220;newspapers&#8221;.  So, lets not let the baby go with the bathwater.  Newspapers still give us a &#8220;product&#8221; that almost no bloggers have the time, competences, and staff to delivery and most bloggers blog about the news they receive from newspapers.  Even Dave Winer&#8217;s excellent &#8220;river&#8221;  you recommended in a past post streams the NYT and the BBC. SL</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
