<?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: That New Yorker piece</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.tamark.ca/public/2006/08/03/that-new-yorker-piece/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.tamark.ca/public/2006/08/03/that-new-yorker-piece/</link>
	<description>It&#039;s about the journalism</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 20 May 2012 17:07:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: tish grier</title>
		<link>http://www.tamark.ca/public/2006/08/03/that-new-yorker-piece/comment-page-1/#comment-67395</link>
		<dc:creator>tish grier</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Aug 2006 14:40:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.tamark.ca/students/?p=2270#comment-67395</guid>
		<description>Hi Mark...

these are really great links!  

one problem, though, as per usual, is the people commenting on citizen journalism are people who have limited contact with c.j., and probably no direct involvement in c.j..  

Lemann&#039;s article was interesting in a 5-page academic paper way, but lacked in it a full understanding of citizen journalism &lt;i&gt;in the present&lt;/i&gt; vs. the 18th century.  There are paralells, but there are also big differences--mostly because of the speed of publication and the geographic reach of one&#039;s work (which, nowadays, is pretty broad.)

And even though I totally agree with Johnson, I doubt the issue will rest.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Mark&#8230;</p>
<p>these are really great links!  </p>
<p>one problem, though, as per usual, is the people commenting on citizen journalism are people who have limited contact with c.j., and probably no direct involvement in c.j..  </p>
<p>Lemann&#8217;s article was interesting in a 5-page academic paper way, but lacked in it a full understanding of citizen journalism <i>in the present</i> vs. the 18th century.  There are paralells, but there are also big differences&#8211;mostly because of the speed of publication and the geographic reach of one&#8217;s work (which, nowadays, is pretty broad.)</p>
<p>And even though I totally agree with Johnson, I doubt the issue will rest.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

