<?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 And Generalizations</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.blogherald.com/2007/02/27/bloggers-and-generalizations/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.blogherald.com/2007/02/27/bloggers-and-generalizations/</link>
	<description>The leading source of news covering social media and the blogosphere.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 02:30:55 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
	<item>
		<title>By: Alex</title>
		<link>http://www.blogherald.com/2007/02/27/bloggers-and-generalizations/comment-page-1/#comment-170546</link>
		<dc:creator>Alex</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Feb 2007 22:02:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogherald.com/2007/02/27/bloggers-and-generalizations/#comment-170546</guid>
		<description>I agree with BILLG. Much of the character of blog writing comes from the fact that it&#039;s unrefereed. In the absence of the editor, there&#039;s no secondary authority to the work. As a result, blog writing seems to be more productive in terms of creativity. However, it somehow falls short of credibility, much like Wikipedia versus theses and dissertations. I, myself, let typos and grammar lapses slide. I think it&#039;s because of the urgency of posting ASAP to assure yourself of &quot;hot news&quot; rather than posting a polished work.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I agree with BILLG. Much of the character of blog writing comes from the fact that it&#8217;s unrefereed. In the absence of the editor, there&#8217;s no secondary authority to the work. As a result, blog writing seems to be more productive in terms of creativity. However, it somehow falls short of credibility, much like Wikipedia versus theses and dissertations. I, myself, let typos and grammar lapses slide. I think it&#8217;s because of the urgency of posting ASAP to assure yourself of &#8220;hot news&#8221; rather than posting a polished work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: billg</title>
		<link>http://www.blogherald.com/2007/02/27/bloggers-and-generalizations/comment-page-1/#comment-170543</link>
		<dc:creator>billg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 27 Feb 2007 21:04:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.blogherald.com/2007/02/27/bloggers-and-generalizations/#comment-170543</guid>
		<description>People tend to make sweeping generalizations.  Usually, only the people we&#039;re talking to hear us. Blogging gives the same people -- us -- the means to publish the same sweeping generalizations without the intervening benefit of an editor to call them on it. 

Blogging certainly increases the visibility of our little epistles, but I&#039;m begging to doubt it does anything more than that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>People tend to make sweeping generalizations.  Usually, only the people we&#8217;re talking to hear us. Blogging gives the same people &#8212; us &#8212; the means to publish the same sweeping generalizations without the intervening benefit of an editor to call them on it. </p>
<p>Blogging certainly increases the visibility of our little epistles, but I&#8217;m begging to doubt it does anything more than that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

