<?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: Open Post</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sistertoldjah.com/archives/2006/11/04/open-post/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sistertoldjah.com/archives/2006/11/04/open-post/</link>
	<description>Don&#039;t dis or dismiss this miss!</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 02:23:12 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Great White Rat</title>
		<link>http://sistertoldjah.com/archives/2006/11/04/open-post/comment-page-1/#comment-580888</link>
		<dc:creator>Great White Rat</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Nov 2006 05:28:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sistertoldjah.com/archives/2006/11/04/open-post/#comment-580888</guid>
		<description>To continue with Baklava&#039;s theme, the November 6 issue of City Journal has a good essay:  What ever happened to patriotic reporters?

It gives some number to support Baklava:

&lt;blockquote&gt;When the Center for Media and Public Affairs made a nonpartisan evaluation of network news broadcasts, it found that during the active war against Saddam Hussein, 51% of the reports about the conflict were negative. Six months after the land battle ended, 77% were negative; in the 2004 general election, 89% were negative; by the spring of 2006, 94% were negative. This decline in media support was much faster than during Korea or Vietnam.
&lt;/blockquote&gt;

I&#039;d put the link here, but for some reason it isn&#039;t showing up in the preview...I notice that happens sometimes here.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To continue with Baklava&#8217;s theme, the November 6 issue of City Journal has a good essay:  What ever happened to patriotic reporters?</p>
<p>It gives some number to support Baklava:</p>
<blockquote><p>When the Center for Media and Public Affairs made a nonpartisan evaluation of network news broadcasts, it found that during the active war against Saddam Hussein, 51% of the reports about the conflict were negative. Six months after the land battle ended, 77% were negative; in the 2004 general election, 89% were negative; by the spring of 2006, 94% were negative. This decline in media support was much faster than during Korea or Vietnam.
</p></blockquote>
<p>I&#8217;d put the link here, but for some reason it isn&#8217;t showing up in the preview&#8230;I notice that happens sometimes here.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sister Toldjah</title>
		<link>http://sistertoldjah.com/archives/2006/11/04/open-post/comment-page-1/#comment-580018</link>
		<dc:creator>Sister Toldjah</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 06 Nov 2006 15:32:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sistertoldjah.com/archives/2006/11/04/open-post/#comment-580018</guid>
		<description>&lt;em&gt;Moved from another thread.  --ST&lt;/em&gt;

The &lt;a href=&quot;http://tammybruce.com/2006/11/the_two_faces.php&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;two faces of Newsweek from Tammy Bruce&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;:

In Tammy&#039;s post is this:
&lt;blockquote&gt;The Department of Defense took issue with Newsweek&#039;s bias, and requested a column to &quot;rebut some of the more sensational charges.&quot; And how did Newsweek respond?

    &lt;em&gt;Newsweek dismissed the rebuttal as the &quot;government position&quot; as well as the request for a stand-alone column. The &lt;strong&gt;Pentagon&#039;s response to that letter&lt;/strong&gt; read in part: &quot;First, a â€˜concise&#039; letter to the editor, of say, 200 words, &lt;strong&gt;cannot adequately address a 2200-word article containing a series of false assertions. Second, the issue is not Newsweek&#039;s position versus the â€˜government position.&#039; The issue is that your readers were given a one-sided, opinion-laced article on Afghanistan based on falsehoods&lt;/strong&gt;—which is something that journalists and editors are usually concerned about. Your dismissive reply is disappointing, to say the least.&quot;&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/blockquote&gt;

Comment by Baklava @ 11/6/2006 - 10:26 am</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><em>Moved from another thread.  &#8211;ST</em></p>
<p>The <a href="http://tammybruce.com/2006/11/the_two_faces.php" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><strong>two faces of Newsweek from Tammy Bruce</strong></a>:</p>
<p>In Tammy&#8217;s post is this:</p>
<blockquote><p>The Department of Defense took issue with Newsweek&#8217;s bias, and requested a column to &#8220;rebut some of the more sensational charges.&#8221; And how did Newsweek respond?</p>
<p>    <em>Newsweek dismissed the rebuttal as the &#8220;government position&#8221; as well as the request for a stand-alone column. The <strong>Pentagon&#8217;s response to that letter</strong> read in part: &#8220;First, a â€˜concise&#8217; letter to the editor, of say, 200 words, <strong>cannot adequately address a 2200-word article containing a series of false assertions. Second, the issue is not Newsweek&#8217;s position versus the â€˜government position.&#8217; The issue is that your readers were given a one-sided, opinion-laced article on Afghanistan based on falsehoods</strong>—which is something that journalists and editors are usually concerned about. Your dismissive reply is disappointing, to say the least.&#8221;</em></p></blockquote>
<p>Comment by Baklava @ 11/6/2006 &#8211; 10:26 am</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Baklava</title>
		<link>http://sistertoldjah.com/archives/2006/11/04/open-post/comment-page-1/#comment-578934</link>
		<dc:creator>Baklava</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Nov 2006 15:45:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sistertoldjah.com/archives/2006/11/04/open-post/#comment-578934</guid>
		<description>U.S. 4.4% France 9.9% I see France broke the double digit barrier. &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.willisms.com/archives/2006/11/trivia_tidbit_o_370.html&quot; target=&quot;_blank&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;What does U.S. Unemployment look like&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/a&gt;? It looks very good.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>U.S. 4.4% France 9.9% I see France broke the double digit barrier. <a href="http://www.willisms.com/archives/2006/11/trivia_tidbit_o_370.html" target="_blank" rel="nofollow"><strong>What does U.S. Unemployment look like</strong></a>? It looks very good.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian</title>
		<link>http://sistertoldjah.com/archives/2006/11/04/open-post/comment-page-1/#comment-578092</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Nov 2006 00:24:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sistertoldjah.com/archives/2006/11/04/open-post/#comment-578092</guid>
		<description>Hi, Dana.

Yeah, we both have that.  She has it set so that she can moderate the comments.  Which is a good idea, because I&#039;ve found on my own site that Askimet sometimes blocks legit comments and trackbacks.  I think that identified spam still gets blocked, but the questionable stuff comes through and gets placed in the moderation mode.  Some are actual comments.

I like how she&#039;s got it set up, so I&#039;ve done the same thing on my site.  Time will tell if it works properly, and whether or not it stays. =D</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi, Dana.</p>
<p>Yeah, we both have that.  She has it set so that she can moderate the comments.  Which is a good idea, because I&#8217;ve found on my own site that Askimet sometimes blocks legit comments and trackbacks.  I think that identified spam still gets blocked, but the questionable stuff comes through and gets placed in the moderation mode.  Some are actual comments.</p>
<p>I like how she&#8217;s got it set up, so I&#8217;ve done the same thing on my site.  Time will tell if it works properly, and whether or not it stays. =D</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dana</title>
		<link>http://sistertoldjah.com/archives/2006/11/04/open-post/comment-page-1/#comment-578080</link>
		<dc:creator>Dana</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Nov 2006 00:01:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sistertoldjah.com/archives/2006/11/04/open-post/#comment-578080</guid>
		<description>Brian and Sis: After using a captcha feature and having a very extensive moderation and kill queue, I finally installed the Akismet spam plug-in for WordPress on my site -- and it has worked very well.

So far, in just three weeks, it has caught over 3,100 spams (or is the plural of spam, spam?), and only a couple of them have been real comments.  Akismet allows you to review the caught spam before deleting everything; the one problem I&#039;ve had is that when it goes onto a second page (each page shows forty spam), whenever I try to access a page beyond the first, I get a page not found error.  Thus, I &lt;i&gt;may&lt;/i&gt; have deleted a proper reader comment, but, out of 3,100, the vast majority of which I reviewed, only a couple were legit.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Brian and Sis: After using a captcha feature and having a very extensive moderation and kill queue, I finally installed the Akismet spam plug-in for WordPress on my site &#8212; and it has worked very well.</p>
<p>So far, in just three weeks, it has caught over 3,100 spams (or is the plural of spam, spam?), and only a couple of them have been real comments.  Akismet allows you to review the caught spam before deleting everything; the one problem I&#8217;ve had is that when it goes onto a second page (each page shows forty spam), whenever I try to access a page beyond the first, I get a page not found error.  Thus, I <i>may</i> have deleted a proper reader comment, but, out of 3,100, the vast majority of which I reviewed, only a couple were legit.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
