<?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: NoTW Lesson: The Coverup Is Usually More Damaging Than The Original Crime</title>
	<atom:link href="http://paidcontent.org/2011/07/13/419-notw-lesson-the-coverup-is-usually-more-damaging-than-the-original-crim/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://paidcontent.org/2011/07/13/419-notw-lesson-the-coverup-is-usually-more-damaging-than-the-original-crim/</link>
	<description>The economics of digital content</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 May 2013 21:53:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew Boer</title>
		<link>http://paidcontent.org/2011/07/13/419-notw-lesson-the-coverup-is-usually-more-damaging-than-the-original-crim/#comment-84537</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Andrew Boer]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 13 Jul 2011 23:50:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://paidcontent.wp.gostage.it/2011/07/13/419-notw-lesson-the-coverup-is-usually-more-damaging-than-the-original-crim/#comment-84537</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I think you make a great point about the importance of a publishing brand&#039;s journalistic credibility -- but I think for most brands we are well past that point as readers and consumers of media.   Forget Jayson Blair&#039;s making up facts -- many believe that a major contributing factor for our entering a ten year war (that crippled our economy) was because people relied on and trusted the journalistic integrity of the New York Times in regard to WMD.  
 
A few brands might be able to survive based on a limited mission, a high level of trust, and great editing (say the Economist), but many (and I think the Huffington Post is a perfect example of this) are going to be judged and trusted not at the domain or brand level -- but at the author and article level. 

PS  I haven&#039;t really followed the NoTW story, but my impression was that involved phone-hacking to get a story. That may be awful, illegal and unethical behavior, but if I were a consumer of that kind of content, I would still consider the stories they printed highly credible.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think you make a great point about the importance of a publishing brand&#8217;s journalistic credibility &#8212; but I think for most brands we are well past that point as readers and consumers of media.   Forget Jayson Blair&#8217;s making up facts &#8212; many believe that a major contributing factor for our entering a ten year war (that crippled our economy) was because people relied on and trusted the journalistic integrity of the New York Times in regard to WMD. <br />
 <br />
A few brands might be able to survive based on a limited mission, a high level of trust, and great editing (say the Economist), but many (and I think the Huffington Post is a perfect example of this) are going to be judged and trusted not at the domain or brand level &#8212; but at the author and article level. </p>
<p>PS  I haven&#8217;t really followed the NoTW story, but my impression was that involved phone-hacking to get a story. That may be awful, illegal and unethical behavior, but if I were a consumer of that kind of content, I would still consider the stories they printed highly credible.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
