<?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: I&#8217;m Anti-Twitter; Part V</title>
	<atom:link href="/2009/04/im-anti-twitter-part-v/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://thegimcrackmiscellany.com/2009/04/im-anti-twitter-part-v/</link>
	<description>read. learn. sleep. soundly.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Dec 2010 21:35:02 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Gimcracker</title>
		<link>https://thegimcrackmiscellany.com/2009/04/im-anti-twitter-part-v/comment-page-1/#comment-6394</link>
		<dc:creator>The Gimcracker</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2009 16:45:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://thegimcrackmiscellany.com/?p=949#comment-6394</guid>
		<description>That is true. News companies don&#039;t care about the news, they just care about the ratings, so they will put up any news they want. 

However, it is a fallacy to say that since the current news broadcasting companies aren&#039;t getting the job done, then Twitter is the way to go. Two wrongs don&#039;t make a right. I think neither are right. An independent news company without an agenda that has the resources/connections to be able to report real news to us would be ideal.

That being said, I agree with you because the amount I hate Twitter is eclipsed by the amount I despise the corruption in the media. It&#039;s like complaining about the soundtrack to Tomb Raider The Movie and ignoring the bigger issue at hand: THE MOVIE SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN MADE.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That is true. News companies don&#8217;t care about the news, they just care about the ratings, so they will put up any news they want. </p>
<p>However, it is a fallacy to say that since the current news broadcasting companies aren&#8217;t getting the job done, then Twitter is the way to go. Two wrongs don&#8217;t make a right. I think neither are right. An independent news company without an agenda that has the resources/connections to be able to report real news to us would be ideal.</p>
<p>That being said, I agree with you because the amount I hate Twitter is eclipsed by the amount I despise the corruption in the media. It&#8217;s like complaining about the soundtrack to Tomb Raider The Movie and ignoring the bigger issue at hand: THE MOVIE SHOULD HAVE NEVER BEEN MADE.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jesse</title>
		<link>https://thegimcrackmiscellany.com/2009/04/im-anti-twitter-part-v/comment-page-1/#comment-6393</link>
		<dc:creator>Jesse</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 20 Apr 2009 16:37:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://thegimcrackmiscellany.com/?p=949#comment-6393</guid>
		<description>Yeah, but the &quot;professional journalists&quot; are even more corrupt and owned than Kutcher is.  The networks are owned by bigger corporations with the result being focused on making money - i.e. getting more advertisers on the program.  Getting more advertisers means having better ratings.  How do networks get better ratings?  Have the most interesting headlines.  Objectivity isn&#039;t a requirement anymore, it&#039;s just kind of nice if you show it every once in awhile.

Is that news?  Is that objectively reporting what&#039;s going on in America?  No, it&#039;s having the most interesting headlines.  Who cares if it&#039;s fair or unbiased, the most people will watch it, so lets fire it up. 

The thing I can get behind is people reporting the truth.  If social media and...ugh..Twitter gives people a chance to do that then yes, as much as I hate to say it - I&#039;m all for that too.

The day of someone going to college and learning how to do &quot;teh news&quot; is over.  You learn how to report whatever your parent corporation guidelines lets you report, or whatever will get you the most ratings.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, but the &#8220;professional journalists&#8221; are even more corrupt and owned than Kutcher is.  The networks are owned by bigger corporations with the result being focused on making money &#8211; i.e. getting more advertisers on the program.  Getting more advertisers means having better ratings.  How do networks get better ratings?  Have the most interesting headlines.  Objectivity isn&#8217;t a requirement anymore, it&#8217;s just kind of nice if you show it every once in awhile.</p>
<p>Is that news?  Is that objectively reporting what&#8217;s going on in America?  No, it&#8217;s having the most interesting headlines.  Who cares if it&#8217;s fair or unbiased, the most people will watch it, so lets fire it up. </p>
<p>The thing I can get behind is people reporting the truth.  If social media and&#8230;ugh..Twitter gives people a chance to do that then yes, as much as I hate to say it &#8211; I&#8217;m all for that too.</p>
<p>The day of someone going to college and learning how to do &#8220;teh news&#8221; is over.  You learn how to report whatever your parent corporation guidelines lets you report, or whatever will get you the most ratings.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
