<?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: Condé Makes Another Digital Move: Someone to Sell Ads</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/20090205/conde-makes-another-digital-move-someone-to-sell-ads/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/20090205/conde-makes-another-digital-move-someone-to-sell-ads/</link>
	<description>by Peter Kafka</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 16:52:18 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Eric Welch</title>
		<link>http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/20090205/conde-makes-another-digital-move-someone-to-sell-ads/comment-page-1/#comment-2237</link>
		<dc:creator>Eric Welch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2009 16:30:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/?p=3907#comment-2237</guid>
		<description>WIRED has not impressed me with its reporting on the web. I&#039;m not sure exactly what the problem is, other than it seems not enough time goes into researching the facts for stories. But I&#039;ve pretty much given up on relying on them for any kind of news/comment/tech information.

Now that Condé Nast has taken over one of my favorite web hangouts (Arstechnica) I&#039;m a bit worried it might become more like WIRED. I certainly hope they hit a workable formula for making money online. Because unless someone does, where are we going to get good in-depth reporting and stories with the right amount of time invested in their production to make them news and not just the news-world&#039;s equivalent of shovelware?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>WIRED has not impressed me with its reporting on the web. I&#8217;m not sure exactly what the problem is, other than it seems not enough time goes into researching the facts for stories. But I&#8217;ve pretty much given up on relying on them for any kind of news/comment/tech information.</p>
<p>Now that Condé Nast has taken over one of my favorite web hangouts (Arstechnica) I&#8217;m a bit worried it might become more like WIRED. I certainly hope they hit a workable formula for making money online. Because unless someone does, where are we going to get good in-depth reporting and stories with the right amount of time invested in their production to make them news and not just the news-world&#8217;s equivalent of shovelware?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: racetalkblog.com &#187; Conde Nast Looses Digital Editor to SAI, Adds Digital Finance Chief, SAI Gets Scooped</title>
		<link>http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/20090205/conde-makes-another-digital-move-someone-to-sell-ads/comment-page-1/#comment-2207</link>
		<dc:creator>racetalkblog.com &#187; Conde Nast Looses Digital Editor to SAI, Adds Digital Finance Chief, SAI Gets Scooped</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Feb 2009 22:46:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/?p=3907#comment-2207</guid>
		<description>[...] appears to be putting money and resources into growing their digital business. From Ives and cited by Peter Kafka at All Things Digital: &#8220;Mr. Schutte was tapped to lead The New Yorker in January 2008 but was never as successful [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] appears to be putting money and resources into growing their digital business. From Ives and cited by Peter Kafka at All Things Digital: &#8220;Mr. Schutte was tapped to lead The New Yorker in January 2008 but was never as successful [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

