<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.4" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google Local News</title>
	<link>http://www.sixtysecondview.com/?p=600</link>
	<description>Sixty second interviews from pr, media and politics</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 08 Sep 2010 14:42:45 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: kbossi</title>
		<link>http://www.sixtysecondview.com/?p=600#comment-76358</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Feb 2008 15:53:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.sixtysecondview.com/?p=600#comment-76358</guid>
					<description>Interesting stuff.  I say that’s fine – let them do the aggregation and let people go to them for news.  It becomes a distribution issue – like the Marriott or Hilton hotel that chooses to drop complimentary IHTs in guestrooms rather than FTs.  News/media companies are having to look at new and clever ways to syndicate themselves more widely and more relevantly across the Web (e.g. via aggregators) so they can keep their ad revenue.  They need to start worrying about things like semantic tags, links, keywords, etc.  The economics of advertising + exposure keep this stuff real, and give us some criteria to work from in terms of rating these news sources and their influence.  But isn’t the source still the source? It just becomes an issue of how info is distributed and the tools we use to track that.  Hey, Google might even help us track that!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Interesting stuff.  I say that’s fine – let them do the aggregation and let people go to them for news.  It becomes a distribution issue – like the Marriott or Hilton hotel that chooses to drop complimentary IHTs in guestrooms rather than FTs.  News/media companies are having to look at new and clever ways to syndicate themselves more widely and more relevantly across the Web (e.g. via aggregators) so they can keep their ad revenue.  They need to start worrying about things like semantic tags, links, keywords, etc.  The economics of advertising + exposure keep this stuff real, and give us some criteria to work from in terms of rating these news sources and their influence.  But isn’t the source still the source? It just becomes an issue of how info is distributed and the tools we use to track that.  Hey, Google might even help us track that!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Amelia</title>
		<link>http://www.sixtysecondview.com/?p=600#comment-74448</link>
		<pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2008 22:03:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.sixtysecondview.com/?p=600#comment-74448</guid>
					<description>Couldn't agree with you more. 

http://ameliatorode.typepad.com/life_moves_pretty_fast/2007/02/google_is_not_a.html

(though I have to say that it scares me quite a lot!)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Couldn&#8217;t agree with you more. </p>
<p><a href='http://ameliatorode.typepad.com/life_moves_pretty_fast/2007/02/google_is_not_a.html' rel='nofollow'>http://ameliatorode.typepad.com/life_moves_pretty_fast/2007/02/google_is_not_a.html</a></p>
<p>(though I have to say that it scares me quite a lot!)
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
