<?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: Why &#8220;junk traffic&#8221; isn&#8217;t so junky</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.wordyard.com/2009/11/11/why-junk-traffic-isnt-so-junky/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.wordyard.com/2009/11/11/why-junk-traffic-isnt-so-junky/</link>
	<description>Technology, politics, culture</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Jul 2010 17:38:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=abc</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nathan</title>
		<link>http://www.wordyard.com/2009/11/11/why-junk-traffic-isnt-so-junky/comment-page-1/#comment-13007</link>
		<dc:creator>Nathan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 13:18:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wordyard.com/?p=2319#comment-13007</guid>
		<description>Scott,

Hey, it looks like I was prescient... if Carr sees the same thing...

http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2009/11/murdochs_moment.php

~Nathan</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Scott,</p>
<p>Hey, it looks like I was prescient&#8230; if Carr sees the same thing&#8230;</p>
<p><a href="http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2009/11/murdochs_moment.php" rel="nofollow">http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2009/11/murdochs_moment.php</a></p>
<p>~Nathan</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nathan</title>
		<link>http://www.wordyard.com/2009/11/11/why-junk-traffic-isnt-so-junky/comment-page-1/#comment-12898</link>
		<dc:creator>Nathan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 13:01:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.wordyard.com/?p=2319#comment-12898</guid>
		<description>I hope Murdoch pulls out.  In fact, I think Google (or Yahoo, or Bing) should be paying big bucks to newspapers in order to use them in their search results.

If Murdoch can get the ball rolling, why not have the search engines compete to see who can secure what news organization?  Bing bids so much, than Google, than....

I guess I&#039;m just frustrated, seeing the Pirate party in Sweden and all.  Where does it end?  I am a more conservative person, and so I do indeed not like the bias in the mainstream media that I see.  

But I also respect these people.  Many of them risk their lives in covering issues, particularly in war zones.  The &quot;leather foot&quot; journalism they do is valuable.  And quite honestly, I think I appreciate it less when I get it for free.  I think that it should be free...

These people need to be paid.  And I don&#039;t want the government doing it.  So who will.

Go Murdoch.  

~Nathan</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I hope Murdoch pulls out.  In fact, I think Google (or Yahoo, or Bing) should be paying big bucks to newspapers in order to use them in their search results.</p>
<p>If Murdoch can get the ball rolling, why not have the search engines compete to see who can secure what news organization?  Bing bids so much, than Google, than&#8230;.</p>
<p>I guess I&#8217;m just frustrated, seeing the Pirate party in Sweden and all.  Where does it end?  I am a more conservative person, and so I do indeed not like the bias in the mainstream media that I see.  </p>
<p>But I also respect these people.  Many of them risk their lives in covering issues, particularly in war zones.  The &#8220;leather foot&#8221; journalism they do is valuable.  And quite honestly, I think I appreciate it less when I get it for free.  I think that it should be free&#8230;</p>
<p>These people need to be paid.  And I don&#8217;t want the government doing it.  So who will.</p>
<p>Go Murdoch.  </p>
<p>~Nathan</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
