<?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/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Do You Want Lies?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2009/03/17/do-you-want-lies/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2009/03/17/do-you-want-lies/</link>
	<description>What&#039;s Hot &#38; What&#039;s Cooking in Scholarly Publishing - from the Society for Scholarly Publishing</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 05:16:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: thorn</title>
		<link>http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2009/03/17/do-you-want-lies/#comment-2595</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[thorn]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2009 19:13:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/?p=3308#comment-2595</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[the problem has shifted from &#039;making something available to the public&#039; to &#039;getting the public to look at *your* thing&#039;. i suspect the two problems have been related since the printing press was first invented; but the first problem has effectively been replaced by the second. i wonder what this will mean for what information survives and spreads, and what information stagnates and then disappears. or perhaps no information will ever disappear again?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>the problem has shifted from &#8216;making something available to the public&#8217; to &#8216;getting the public to look at *your* thing&#8217;. i suspect the two problems have been related since the printing press was first invented; but the first problem has effectively been replaced by the second. i wonder what this will mean for what information survives and spreads, and what information stagnates and then disappears. or perhaps no information will ever disappear again?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ted Freeman</title>
		<link>http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2009/03/17/do-you-want-lies/#comment-2593</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Ted Freeman]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 Mar 2009 14:36:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/?p=3308#comment-2593</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This is the best kind of article: educational, thought provoking and entertaining at the same time. Thanks for pointing it out, Kent. For scholarly publishers, Shirky&#039;s explanation for the success of Consumer Reports (with no ad revenue) is significant. On the Internet people will pay for the &quot;unimpeachability&quot; of unbiased expert opinion. Those feeling pressure from Web 2.0-driven and other &quot;innovative&quot; Internet business models need to remember that.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is the best kind of article: educational, thought provoking and entertaining at the same time. Thanks for pointing it out, Kent. For scholarly publishers, Shirky&#8217;s explanation for the success of Consumer Reports (with no ad revenue) is significant. On the Internet people will pay for the &#8220;unimpeachability&#8221; of unbiased expert opinion. Those feeling pressure from Web 2.0-driven and other &#8220;innovative&#8221; Internet business models need to remember that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

