<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: ONA: Blogging ethics</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.lostremote.com/2007/10/18/ona-blogging-ethics/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.lostremote.com/2007/10/18/ona-blogging-ethics/</link>
	<description>Where TV Finds the Future</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 10:53:17 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: mcw</title>
		<link>http://www.lostremote.com/2007/10/18/ona-blogging-ethics/#comment-531171</link>
		<dc:creator>mcw</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Oct 2007 03:41:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.lostremote.com/2007/10/18/ona-blogging-ethics/#comment-531171</guid>
		<description>Who had a chance to speak up? It wasn't a discussion as much as random thoughts. And when a moderator labels some questions 'good' and is the only one with a mike can  a good  dicussion result?  
 
Why would blogging ethics differ from journalism ethics?

The session raised questions and offered ideas to consider but I can't see how ONA can succeed with this policy or guidelines</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Who had a chance to speak up? It wasn&#8217;t a discussion as much as random thoughts. And when a moderator labels some questions &#8216;good&#8217; and is the only one with a mike can  a good  dicussion result?  </p>
<p>Why would blogging ethics differ from journalism ethics?</p>
<p>The session raised questions and offered ideas to consider but I can&#8217;t see how ONA can succeed with this policy or guidelines</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
