<?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: Why newspapers make bad decisions</title>
	<atom:link href="http://korrvalues.com/2008/03/10/why-newspapers-make-bad-decisions/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://korrvalues.com/2008/03/10/why-newspapers-make-bad-decisions/</link>
	<description>"Other things deserve blogs too"</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 30 Apr 2010 19:37:44 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles-A Rovira</title>
		<link>http://korrvalues.com/2008/03/10/why-newspapers-make-bad-decisions/#comment-2918</link>
		<dc:creator>Charles-A Rovira</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jan 2009 17:47:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://korrvalues.wordpress.com/?p=48#comment-2918</guid>
		<description>&quot;most important resources it gave me that I couldn’t get online — a week’s worth of planning in one shot&quot;

Uh, with TiVO, HULU.com, iTunes, podcasts, webcasts and other time and place shifting websites, the concept of needing &quot;a week&#039;s worth of planning in one shot&quot; is not necessary.

I get whatever media I require, text, audio and video, when I require it.

No more &quot;tyranny of the transmitter&quot; telling me that I wasn&#039;t in front of the tube at 8 PM on Wednesday the 4th so I missed whatever it was that the transmitter was spewing forth that day.

The thing to realize about the RCA picture of &quot;Nipper&quot; listening to his &quot;Master&#039;s Voice&quot; was that YOU were being treated like a poor, dumb son-of-a-bitch.

I prefer to get my media online whenever I can deal with it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;most important resources it gave me that I couldn’t get online — a week’s worth of planning in one shot&#8221;</p>
<p>Uh, with TiVO, HULU.com, iTunes, podcasts, webcasts and other time and place shifting websites, the concept of needing &#8220;a week&#8217;s worth of planning in one shot&#8221; is not necessary.</p>
<p>I get whatever media I require, text, audio and video, when I require it.</p>
<p>No more &#8220;tyranny of the transmitter&#8221; telling me that I wasn&#8217;t in front of the tube at 8 PM on Wednesday the 4th so I missed whatever it was that the transmitter was spewing forth that day.</p>
<p>The thing to realize about the RCA picture of &#8220;Nipper&#8221; listening to his &#8220;Master&#8217;s Voice&#8221; was that YOU were being treated like a poor, dumb son-of-a-bitch.</p>
<p>I prefer to get my media online whenever I can deal with it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jeremy Korr</title>
		<link>http://korrvalues.com/2008/03/10/why-newspapers-make-bad-decisions/#comment-100</link>
		<dc:creator>Jeremy Korr</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Mar 2008 23:23:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://korrvalues.wordpress.com/?p=48#comment-100</guid>
		<description>Josh wrote: &quot;There are plenty of other newspaper elements that are beyond justification, or at least deserve a rethinking — box scores and general sports agate, TV and movie listings, op-ed pages.&quot;

I&#039;m with you on the stock tables (outdated in minutes). But the other elements, not so sure. As my students remind me, an awful lot of people (in raw numbers) don&#039;t have fast Internet access or even home access at all. Those box scores and op-ed pages take a long time to load via dial-up. And one of the  reasons I subscribe to print newspapers is to have the TV listings as a ready reference without having to go online yet again. The L.A. Times recently dropped its weekly TV guide section, and I&#039;m seriously considering dropping my subscription because that was one of the most important resources it gave me that I couldn&#039;t get online -- a week&#039;s worth of planning in one shot, whenever I wanted.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Josh wrote: &#8220;There are plenty of other newspaper elements that are beyond justification, or at least deserve a rethinking — box scores and general sports agate, TV and movie listings, op-ed pages.&#8221;</p>
<p>I&#8217;m with you on the stock tables (outdated in minutes). But the other elements, not so sure. As my students remind me, an awful lot of people (in raw numbers) don&#8217;t have fast Internet access or even home access at all. Those box scores and op-ed pages take a long time to load via dial-up. And one of the  reasons I subscribe to print newspapers is to have the TV listings as a ready reference without having to go online yet again. The L.A. Times recently dropped its weekly TV guide section, and I&#8217;m seriously considering dropping my subscription because that was one of the most important resources it gave me that I couldn&#8217;t get online &#8212; a week&#8217;s worth of planning in one shot, whenever I wanted.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Notes from a Teacher: Mark on Media &#187; Monday squibs</title>
		<link>http://korrvalues.com/2008/03/10/why-newspapers-make-bad-decisions/#comment-92</link>
		<dc:creator>Notes from a Teacher: Mark on Media &#187; Monday squibs</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Mar 2008 04:35:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://korrvalues.wordpress.com/?p=48#comment-92</guid>
		<description>[...] Why newspapers make bad decisions. Much of this has been said before, but the fact it needs repeating shows how far(?) newspaper decision-making has come. Concludes this way: &#8220;&#8230; if newspapers can’t intelligently and pro-actively decide that Marmaduke and stock tables have had their day, they probably can’t make intelligent higher-level decisions, either.&#8221; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Why newspapers make bad decisions. Much of this has been said before, but the fact it needs repeating shows how far(?) newspaper decision-making has come. Concludes this way: &#8220;&#8230; if newspapers can’t intelligently and pro-actively decide that Marmaduke and stock tables have had their day, they probably can’t make intelligent higher-level decisions, either.&#8221; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
