<?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: NBC&#8217;s Lisa Daniels Is Not a Rock Star</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mondoweiss.net/2007/03/nbcs_lisa_danie.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mondoweiss.net/2007/03/nbcs_lisa_danie.html</link>
	<description>The War of Ideas in the Middle East</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 27 May 2012 20:37:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>By: Richard Silverstein</title>
		<link>http://mondoweiss.net/2007/03/nbcs_lisa_danie.html/comment-page-1#comment-72770</link>
		<dc:creator>Richard Silverstein</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Nov 1999 23:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.philipweiss.org/mondoweiss/2007/03/26/nbcs_lisa_danie.html#comment-72770</guid>
		<description>&lt;p&gt;Yes, I completely agree with you, Phil.  Wikipedia may not be as realiable a source as the research tomes in yr college library, but then again Wikipedia reaches a lot more people &amp; is accessed &amp; edited by a lot more people than yr avg. library.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Of course errors creep into it.  Of course ideologues &amp; vandals deface it.  But what Daniels doesn&#039;t note is that as soon as she broadcast her report I&#039;m sure her entry was edited within minutes by some enterprising Wikipedia editor who wanted to correct the record.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;And for the record, what Daniels did is considered vandalism at the Wikipedia site.  Definitely not cool.  Even sophomoric I&#039;d say.&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yes, I completely agree with you, Phil.  Wikipedia may not be as realiable a source as the research tomes in yr college library, but then again Wikipedia reaches a lot more people &amp; is accessed &amp; edited by a lot more people than yr avg. library.</p>
<p>Of course errors creep into it.  Of course ideologues &amp; vandals deface it.  But what Daniels doesn&#39;t note is that as soon as she broadcast her report I&#39;m sure her entry was edited within minutes by some enterprising Wikipedia editor who wanted to correct the record.</p>
<p>And for the record, what Daniels did is considered vandalism at the Wikipedia site.  Definitely not cool.  Even sophomoric I&#39;d say.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>


