<?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: Bloggers Are Playing With Fire</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thewebpreneur.com/2007/05/24/bloggers-are-playing-with-fire/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thewebpreneur.com/2007/05/24/bloggers-are-playing-with-fire/</link>
	<description>Just another WordPress weblog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2010 02:50:55 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Nick ONeill</title>
		<link>http://www.thewebpreneur.com/2007/05/24/bloggers-are-playing-with-fire/comment-page-1/#comment-802</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick ONeill</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2007 16:12:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thewebpreneur.com/2007/05/24/bloggers-are-playing-with-fire/#comment-802</guid>
		<description>Hi Alice,

Why just bloggers?  -  Well anybody that is posting information without verifying their source probably shouldn&#039;t be doing it.

Why should anyone use an anonymous source? If you have a high up source but want to protect their privacy and their job, you won&#039;t release their information.  Just because you aren&#039;t publishing their name doesn&#039;t mean you don&#039;t have accurate info.  Hopefully this answers your question.

How would the public interest be hurt if no information came out until there was an informal announcement?  It wouldn&#039;t be.  Did I suggest this?

Ultimately my point is that as bloggers gain increase their reputation as a go to source for timely information, the integrity of their postings become increasingly important.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Alice,</p>
<p>Why just bloggers?  &#8211;  Well anybody that is posting information without verifying their source probably shouldn&#8217;t be doing it.</p>
<p>Why should anyone use an anonymous source? If you have a high up source but want to protect their privacy and their job, you won&#8217;t release their information.  Just because you aren&#8217;t publishing their name doesn&#8217;t mean you don&#8217;t have accurate info.  Hopefully this answers your question.</p>
<p>How would the public interest be hurt if no information came out until there was an informal announcement?  It wouldn&#8217;t be.  Did I suggest this?</p>
<p>Ultimately my point is that as bloggers gain increase their reputation as a go to source for timely information, the integrity of their postings become increasingly important.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Alice Marshall</title>
		<link>http://www.thewebpreneur.com/2007/05/24/bloggers-are-playing-with-fire/comment-page-1/#comment-801</link>
		<dc:creator>Alice Marshall</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 May 2007 15:57:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thewebpreneur.com/2007/05/24/bloggers-are-playing-with-fire/#comment-801</guid>
		<description>Why just bloggers? Why should anyone use an anonymous source? How would the public interest be hurt if no information came out until there was an informal annoucement?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why just bloggers? Why should anyone use an anonymous source? How would the public interest be hurt if no information came out until there was an informal annoucement?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
