<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: What&#8217;s wrong with this picture?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://jamesbarbour.org/blog/2006/09/26/whats-wrong-with-this-picture/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://jamesbarbour.org/blog/2006/09/26/whats-wrong-with-this-picture/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 19:53:56 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: James</title>
		<link>http://jamesbarbour.org/blog/2006/09/26/whats-wrong-with-this-picture/#comment-108</link>
		<dc:creator>James</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Oct 2006 08:33:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jamesbarbour.org/blog/2006/09/26/whats-wrong-with-this-picture/#comment-108</guid>
		<description>And they've done it again - climate change vs Ken Foley this time: 

http://www.wonkette.com/politics/newsweek/americans-are-stupid-and-newsweek-intends-to-keep-it-that-way-207197.php</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>And they&#8217;ve done it again - climate change vs Ken Foley this time: </p>
<p><a href="http://www.wonkette.com/politics/newsweek/americans-are-stupid-and-newsweek-intends-to-keep-it-that-way-207197.php" rel="nofollow">http://www.wonkette.com/politics/newsweek/americans-are-stupid-and-newsweek-intends-to-keep-it-that-way-207197.php</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Linda Griffin</title>
		<link>http://jamesbarbour.org/blog/2006/09/26/whats-wrong-with-this-picture/#comment-107</link>
		<dc:creator>Linda Griffin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Sep 2006 11:52:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jamesbarbour.org/blog/2006/09/26/whats-wrong-with-this-picture/#comment-107</guid>
		<description>Interestingly/thankfully, today's Guardian has picked up on this: http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1882441,00.html   

In his defence of the publication's differing cover stories, Fareed Zakaria does indeed blame the market. But it still seems to me that Newsweek have blatantly sacrificed something which was supposed to set them apart from the likes of certain upmarket celebrity magazines - afterall, Afghanistan aside, there are many, many more newsworthy and interesting issues happening in the world - and indeed within the US - that people might just want to read about. Yes, we do generally enjoy reading about celebrities, but is that why we buy Newsweek???</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interestingly/thankfully, today&#8217;s Guardian has picked up on this: <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1882441,00.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,,1882441,00.html</a>   </p>
<p>In his defence of the publication&#8217;s differing cover stories, Fareed Zakaria does indeed blame the market. But it still seems to me that Newsweek have blatantly sacrificed something which was supposed to set them apart from the likes of certain upmarket celebrity magazines - afterall, Afghanistan aside, there are many, many more newsworthy and interesting issues happening in the world - and indeed within the US - that people might just want to read about. Yes, we do generally enjoy reading about celebrities, but is that why we buy Newsweek???</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: James</title>
		<link>http://jamesbarbour.org/blog/2006/09/26/whats-wrong-with-this-picture/#comment-106</link>
		<dc:creator>James</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Sep 2006 08:52:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jamesbarbour.org/blog/2006/09/26/whats-wrong-with-this-picture/#comment-106</guid>
		<description>Good points, Owen, and thanks for making them. 

The idealist in me believes that with the power of mass media, and particularly with the inherent credibility of an established title such as Newsweek, comes a certain amount of responsibility.  Look at the Bang Bang Club, for example, or the BBC's reporting of the Ethiopian famine of 1984. 

Of course it's easier to leaf through a magazine full of celeb gossip and fluff pieces than it is to read about war, climate change, famine ... but does this really excuse the media from their obligation to report what's happening out there?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good points, Owen, and thanks for making them. </p>
<p>The idealist in me believes that with the power of mass media, and particularly with the inherent credibility of an established title such as Newsweek, comes a certain amount of responsibility.  Look at the Bang Bang Club, for example, or the BBC&#8217;s reporting of the Ethiopian famine of 1984. </p>
<p>Of course it&#8217;s easier to leaf through a magazine full of celeb gossip and fluff pieces than it is to read about war, climate change, famine &#8230; but does this really excuse the media from their obligation to report what&#8217;s happening out there?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Owen Lystrup</title>
		<link>http://jamesbarbour.org/blog/2006/09/26/whats-wrong-with-this-picture/#comment-105</link>
		<dc:creator>Owen Lystrup</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 26 Sep 2006 21:33:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://jamesbarbour.org/blog/2006/09/26/whats-wrong-with-this-picture/#comment-105</guid>
		<description>Newsweek did some good studying on markets. The medium must have realized that American's are getting damned tired of hearing about wars and America's role in losing them. 

Unfortunately, what Newsweek must have found is that people are not only tired of hearing about them, but also are more interested in stars and the news of Hollywood. 

It's unfortunate, but it's true. 

However, I think Newsweek should have produced the Afghanistan photo on the cover. I think in this case, the magazine (as it partly should be) was more concerned with selling copies</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Newsweek did some good studying on markets. The medium must have realized that American&#8217;s are getting damned tired of hearing about wars and America&#8217;s role in losing them. </p>
<p>Unfortunately, what Newsweek must have found is that people are not only tired of hearing about them, but also are more interested in stars and the news of Hollywood. </p>
<p>It&#8217;s unfortunate, but it&#8217;s true. </p>
<p>However, I think Newsweek should have produced the Afghanistan photo on the cover. I think in this case, the magazine (as it partly should be) was more concerned with selling copies</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
