<?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:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Murdoch-Owned Sun Online Blocks Meltwater Media Monitor</title>
	<atom:link href="http://paidcontent.org/2010/05/14/419-sun-online-blocks-meltwater-media-monitor/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://paidcontent.org/2010/05/14/419-sun-online-blocks-meltwater-media-monitor/</link>
	<description>The economics of digital content</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 16:31:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Hacker</title>
		<link>http://paidcontent.org/2010/05/14/419-sun-online-blocks-meltwater-media-monitor/#comment-78548</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Jim Hacker]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 May 2010 09:05:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://paidcontent.wp.gostage.it/2010/05/14/419-sun-online-blocks-meltwater-media-monitor/#comment-78548</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Typically biased and inaccurate story by Guardian-owned PaidContent which, considering how many times PaidContent has covered the NLA case, is astounding. This is the so-called &quot;quality journalism&quot; that people are being asked to pay to protect. At least the editor had the sense to include a correcting (and accurate) statement by Meltwater. Though this being the web, and not paper, why doesn&#039;t the editor update the original article to remove the original inaccuracies?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Typically biased and inaccurate story by Guardian-owned PaidContent which, considering how many times PaidContent has covered the NLA case, is astounding. This is the so-called &#8220;quality journalism&#8221; that people are being asked to pay to protect. At least the editor had the sense to include a correcting (and accurate) statement by Meltwater. Though this being the web, and not paper, why doesn&#8217;t the editor update the original article to remove the original inaccuracies?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
