<?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: Save the Observer?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://thethirdestate.net/2009/08/save-the-observer/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://thethirdestate.net/2009/08/save-the-observer/</link>
	<description>What Is The Third Estate? Everything. What Has It Been Until Now In The Political Order? Nothing. What Does It Want To Be? Something.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2012 20:19:31 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Salman Shaheen</title>
		<link>http://thethirdestate.net/2009/08/save-the-observer/comment-page-1/#comment-3406</link>
		<dc:creator>Salman Shaheen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Aug 2009 19:21:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thethirdestate.net/?p=1514#comment-3406</guid>
		<description>&quot;Salman, I do see where you are coming from, but I am less sure than you that we need to get into the trenches and defend what we have got. In reality the left is served pretty badly by The Observer. The fact that not very many people read it is a part of this. Meanwhile, outside of what we get from the big four broadsheets – and in the alternative media sphere in particular – we can see progressive journalists doing brilliant things on a shoe string. This is a moment of opportunity. Therefore I don’t think we need to be satisfied with the winner that a multi-millionaire trust happens to have picked.&quot;

- That&#039;s a very interesting argument for an entryist!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Salman, I do see where you are coming from, but I am less sure than you that we need to get into the trenches and defend what we have got. In reality the left is served pretty badly by The Observer. The fact that not very many people read it is a part of this. Meanwhile, outside of what we get from the big four broadsheets – and in the alternative media sphere in particular – we can see progressive journalists doing brilliant things on a shoe string. This is a moment of opportunity. Therefore I don’t think we need to be satisfied with the winner that a multi-millionaire trust happens to have picked.&#8221;</p>
<p>- That&#8217;s a very interesting argument for an entryist!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Reuben</title>
		<link>http://thethirdestate.net/2009/08/save-the-observer/comment-page-1/#comment-3402</link>
		<dc:creator>Reuben</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Aug 2009 17:25:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thethirdestate.net/?p=1514#comment-3402</guid>
		<description>Cheers WD and Sunny. Salman, I do see where you are coming from, but I am less sure than you that we need to get into the trenches and defend what we have got. In reality the left is served pretty badly by The Observer. The fact that not very many people read it is a part of this. Meanwhile, outside of what we get from the big four broadsheets - and in the alternative media sphere in particular - we can see progressive journalists doing brilliant things on a shoe string. This is a moment of opportunity. Therefore I don&#039;t think we need to be satisfied with the winner that a multi-millionaire trust happens to have picked.

As regard Satan/Murdoch&#039;s suggestion, I actually think that in the long run cheap but paid for journalistic content might not be a bad thing. This is because I believe that Journalism is a serious endeavour, and we do need to find some way of enabling those human resources that are necessary to be put into it. This is of course difficult given the freeganistic culture that has built up around web content. Yet as things stand, news and commentary is being reduced to being a bi-product of the advertising industry. If the major players in the media got together and took the lead - perhaps illegal under competition legislation - it might be no bad thing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cheers WD and Sunny. Salman, I do see where you are coming from, but I am less sure than you that we need to get into the trenches and defend what we have got. In reality the left is served pretty badly by The Observer. The fact that not very many people read it is a part of this. Meanwhile, outside of what we get from the big four broadsheets &#8211; and in the alternative media sphere in particular &#8211; we can see progressive journalists doing brilliant things on a shoe string. This is a moment of opportunity. Therefore I don&#8217;t think we need to be satisfied with the winner that a multi-millionaire trust happens to have picked.</p>
<p>As regard Satan/Murdoch&#8217;s suggestion, I actually think that in the long run cheap but paid for journalistic content might not be a bad thing. This is because I believe that Journalism is a serious endeavour, and we do need to find some way of enabling those human resources that are necessary to be put into it. This is of course difficult given the freeganistic culture that has built up around web content. Yet as things stand, news and commentary is being reduced to being a bi-product of the advertising industry. If the major players in the media got together and took the lead &#8211; perhaps illegal under competition legislation &#8211; it might be no bad thing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sunny H</title>
		<link>http://thethirdestate.net/2009/08/save-the-observer/comment-page-1/#comment-3399</link>
		<dc:creator>Sunny H</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Aug 2009 16:08:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thethirdestate.net/?p=1514#comment-3399</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;But perhaps it should cause us to reflect critically upon the institutional stasis in the British media, and the fact that we have been served for donkeys years by the same few papers. Perhaps it is time for new people and new organisations to come in. And if so, then somebody needs to get out.&lt;/i&gt;

I think this point is spot on. Frankly though, because the Obs hasn&#039;t done any proper investigative stories recently, I don&#039;t even see the impact it&#039;s demise will have.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>But perhaps it should cause us to reflect critically upon the institutional stasis in the British media, and the fact that we have been served for donkeys years by the same few papers. Perhaps it is time for new people and new organisations to come in. And if so, then somebody needs to get out.</i></p>
<p>I think this point is spot on. Frankly though, because the Obs hasn&#8217;t done any proper investigative stories recently, I don&#8217;t even see the impact it&#8217;s demise will have.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: WD</title>
		<link>http://thethirdestate.net/2009/08/save-the-observer/comment-page-1/#comment-3398</link>
		<dc:creator>WD</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Aug 2009 15:23:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thethirdestate.net/?p=1514#comment-3398</guid>
		<description>Probably the best article written about this subject so far.

I do share Salman&#039;s view about the vomit inducing thought of a hegemony of the right, especially as the Independent is also in serious trouble - but as I posted on liberal conspiracy, if a paper isn’t shifting enough copies then its going to find a couple of serious looking creditors with baseball bats on its front door at some point.

The stinking elephant in the room on this subject is of course the impact of the net, which is probably largely responsible for the massive decline in newspaper sales across the board. No paper has come up with way to make its online presence profitable. Its indeed noticeable that the Guardian/Observer has arguably the best newspaper web portal and yet its still getting a financial knee capping.

I don’t buy Satan&#039;s - I mean Murdoch&#039;s - solution of charging as a way out as I cant see people paying for online content (why not just go the Beeb or the blogger sphere?). Maybe there isn’t a solution ...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Probably the best article written about this subject so far.</p>
<p>I do share Salman&#8217;s view about the vomit inducing thought of a hegemony of the right, especially as the Independent is also in serious trouble &#8211; but as I posted on liberal conspiracy, if a paper isn’t shifting enough copies then its going to find a couple of serious looking creditors with baseball bats on its front door at some point.</p>
<p>The stinking elephant in the room on this subject is of course the impact of the net, which is probably largely responsible for the massive decline in newspaper sales across the board. No paper has come up with way to make its online presence profitable. Its indeed noticeable that the Guardian/Observer has arguably the best newspaper web portal and yet its still getting a financial knee capping.</p>
<p>I don’t buy Satan&#8217;s &#8211; I mean Murdoch&#8217;s &#8211; solution of charging as a way out as I cant see people paying for online content (why not just go the Beeb or the blogger sphere?). Maybe there isn’t a solution &#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Salman Shaheen</title>
		<link>http://thethirdestate.net/2009/08/save-the-observer/comment-page-1/#comment-3397</link>
		<dc:creator>Salman Shaheen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Aug 2009 14:37:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://thethirdestate.net/?p=1514#comment-3397</guid>
		<description>This is the second time you&#039;ve blasted the existence of a left wing newspaper on this site. Given the hegemony of the right wing press, I do wonder at your solution.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is the second time you&#8217;ve blasted the existence of a left wing newspaper on this site. Given the hegemony of the right wing press, I do wonder at your solution.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

