<?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: A huge disaster in Los Angeles&#8230;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.visualeditors.com/apple/2010/07/a-huge-disaster-in-los-angeles/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.visualeditors.com/apple/2010/07/a-huge-disaster-in-los-angeles/</link>
	<description>www.visualeditors.com/apple</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 04:13:29 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Margaret Shore</title>
		<link>http://www.visualeditors.com/apple/2010/07/a-huge-disaster-in-los-angeles/comment-page-2/#comment-94679</link>
		<dc:creator>Margaret Shore</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jul 2010 21:51:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.visualeditors.com/apple/?p=22345#comment-94679</guid>
		<description>"Fool me twice, shame on me." The fake news of the LA Times has now fooled me more than twice and I am ashamed.  All the opinion expressed on this matter, however contradictory, make sense to me and they're so darned well written and a joy to read. I have little to add except to express my admiration for the humor of the Universal Studios ad.  If I had come across it in the National Lampoon or the Onion I would have laughed my head off right away, instead of feeling confused, annoyed and regretful of the financial challenges that drive good publications to take risks with revenue-generating approaches. Still, once I got the joke, and my resentment faded, I enjoyed the parody a great deal.  Where to go next?  An entire newspaper of faux-ads, consistently well-written and funny?  I'd subscribe.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Fool me twice, shame on me.&#8221; The fake news of the LA Times has now fooled me more than twice and I am ashamed.  All the opinion expressed on this matter, however contradictory, make sense to me and they&#8217;re so darned well written and a joy to read. I have little to add except to express my admiration for the humor of the Universal Studios ad.  If I had come across it in the National Lampoon or the Onion I would have laughed my head off right away, instead of feeling confused, annoyed and regretful of the financial challenges that drive good publications to take risks with revenue-generating approaches. Still, once I got the joke, and my resentment faded, I enjoyed the parody a great deal.  Where to go next?  An entire newspaper of faux-ads, consistently well-written and funny?  I&#8217;d subscribe.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Josh Jackson</title>
		<link>http://www.visualeditors.com/apple/2010/07/a-huge-disaster-in-los-angeles/comment-page-2/#comment-94614</link>
		<dc:creator>Josh Jackson</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jul 2010 15:14:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.visualeditors.com/apple/?p=22345#comment-94614</guid>
		<description>How do you "partially" destroy something?

Roll Tide!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How do you &#8220;partially&#8221; destroy something?</p>
<p>Roll Tide!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: NewsBoy1</title>
		<link>http://www.visualeditors.com/apple/2010/07/a-huge-disaster-in-los-angeles/comment-page-2/#comment-94442</link>
		<dc:creator>NewsBoy1</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 03 Jul 2010 23:45:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.visualeditors.com/apple/?p=22345#comment-94442</guid>
		<description>Get over it people. What the LAT is doing by running these ads is preserving jobs and it's existence in very tough economic times. The bottom line is that daily newspapers themselves continue to become irrelevant. The news that comes out of them is to late the time they arrive at people's homes. I already read about it online. What LAT and other daily pubs has going for it, is it's strong editorial, a very powerful website and a brick and mortar/home delivery system that separates  it from any other website news/entertainment entity out there. The LAT should maximize this distribution advantage to the best of its ability in order to help ensure it's survival and make payroll. If that means running these advertorials and ad cover pages so be it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Get over it people. What the LAT is doing by running these ads is preserving jobs and it&#8217;s existence in very tough economic times. The bottom line is that daily newspapers themselves continue to become irrelevant. The news that comes out of them is to late the time they arrive at people&#8217;s homes. I already read about it online. What LAT and other daily pubs has going for it, is it&#8217;s strong editorial, a very powerful website and a brick and mortar/home delivery system that separates  it from any other website news/entertainment entity out there. The LAT should maximize this distribution advantage to the best of its ability in order to help ensure it&#8217;s survival and make payroll. If that means running these advertorials and ad cover pages so be it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bob Beamesderfer</title>
		<link>http://www.visualeditors.com/apple/2010/07/a-huge-disaster-in-los-angeles/comment-page-2/#comment-94359</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob Beamesderfer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Jul 2010 15:49:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.visualeditors.com/apple/?p=22345#comment-94359</guid>
		<description>The Times still puts out a great deal of respectable work. But the editorial staff has to live with the publisher's decisions good or bad. 

While the paper has had similar ad gimmickry cloaking the front page, a four-page faux news section takes it too far. The publisher defended it as being withing advertising guidelines, but that's feeble argument.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Times still puts out a great deal of respectable work. But the editorial staff has to live with the publisher&#8217;s decisions good or bad. </p>
<p>While the paper has had similar ad gimmickry cloaking the front page, a four-page faux news section takes it too far. The publisher defended it as being withing advertising guidelines, but that&#8217;s feeble argument.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

