<?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: AP Explains Why It Will Ignore Iraq Now That News Is Better</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bizzyblog.com/2008/06/17/ap-explains-why-it-will-ignore-iraq-now-that-news-is-better/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bizzyblog.com/2008/06/17/ap-explains-why-it-will-ignore-iraq-now-that-news-is-better/</link>
	<description>The Business End of the Blogosphere</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Mar 2010 01:33:49 -0700</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: dscott</title>
		<link>http://www.bizzyblog.com/2008/06/17/ap-explains-why-it-will-ignore-iraq-now-that-news-is-better/comment-page-1/#comment-122872</link>
		<dc:creator>dscott</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2008 20:27:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bizzyblog.com/2008/06/17/ap-explains-why-it-will-ignore-iraq-now-that-news-is-better/#comment-122872</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m curious, what is Reuters http://www.reuters.com/ and UPI http://www.upi.com/ stance on this?  I seem to notice at times, these organizations are writing about the same subjects.  How do they stack up on the bias issue?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m curious, what is Reuters <a href="http://www.reuters.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.reuters.com/</a> and UPI <a href="http://www.upi.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.upi.com/</a> stance on this?  I seem to notice at times, these organizations are writing about the same subjects.  How do they stack up on the bias issue?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: S.W. Anderson</title>
		<link>http://www.bizzyblog.com/2008/06/17/ap-explains-why-it-will-ignore-iraq-now-that-news-is-better/comment-page-1/#comment-122860</link>
		<dc:creator>S.W. Anderson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jun 2008 03:43:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bizzyblog.com/2008/06/17/ap-explains-why-it-will-ignore-iraq-now-that-news-is-better/#comment-122860</guid>
		<description>Gosh, I would just like to know what stories unhelpful to the GOP major AP member news organizations are withholding &lt;i&gt;this&lt;/i&gt; presidential election year.

Guess I&#039;ll just have to wait until, oh, maybe the spring or summer &#039;09 to find out. If there are some, I&#039;m sure the news organizations involved will &lt;i&gt;again&lt;/i&gt;, as they did in 2005, claim they didn&#039;t want to affect the outcome of the election by providing information the public needed and deserved to have prior to voting â€” thereby affecting the outcome of the election in a big way.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gosh, I would just like to know what stories unhelpful to the GOP major AP member news organizations are withholding <i>this</i> presidential election year.</p>
<p>Guess I&#8217;ll just have to wait until, oh, maybe the spring or summer &#8216;09 to find out. If there are some, I&#8217;m sure the news organizations involved will <i>again</i>, as they did in 2005, claim they didn&#8217;t want to affect the outcome of the election by providing information the public needed and deserved to have prior to voting â€” thereby affecting the outcome of the election in a big way.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
