<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for CollateralDamage</title><link>http://disqus.com/people/b2ced6d1db126ee27a00a513dc412be0/</link><description></description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:39:41 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Mashable finally adds it all together</title><link>http://thefattytalks.disqus.com/mashable_finally_adds_it_all_together/#comment-4971858</link><description>Until I saw the actual item on Mashable, I thought you had just come up with a brilliant piece of satire on their "XX things you need" lists. I was slackjawed to see that it was Mashable itself that came up with the satire.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">CollateralDamage</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 10 Sep 2007 11:36:14 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: OhGizmo!  &amp;raquo; Archive  &amp;raquo; Grapples - Bio Engineering Gone Right</title><link>http://ohgizmo.disqus.com/ohgizmo_raquo_archive_raquo_grapples_bio_engineering_gone_right/#comment-1761227</link><description>They taste like kids' medicine. Took a bite of one and spit it out. This takes gilding the lilly to a whole new level.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">CollateralDamage</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 28 Feb 2007 11:57:05 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Bloggers vs Journalists and Who Cares</title><link>http://chrisbrogan.disqus.com/bloggers_vs_journalists_and_who_cares/#comment-8515213</link><description>Thoughts from an actual sometime journalist:&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;This is a false dichotomy.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;A blog is a medium, not a type of writing. &lt;br&gt;Someone is a blogger because they write in a blog.&lt;br&gt;It is unfortunate that we now consider a blogger as some different type of writer than one who works on paper or elsewhere.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Writing in a blog can be as neutral and as fact-based as what we hope for in other forms of journalism or it can be as opinionated and non-fact-based as it wants -- or it can be somewhere in between&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Whatever it is, it depends on building trust with the reader. That trust comes in a number of different ways. If you want to be known as a reliable source than you make your writing as accurate and fact-based as you can. On the other hand, I have a blog where I make fun of things -- news events, business, marketing -- I build trust with my readers by being funny. I make it very clear that what they are getting is opinion only inadvertently laced with facts. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The big difference between a journalist with credentials and someone who doesn't have those credentials is this: &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The former has a branded venue and was hired to work there because his or her employer thinks he or she has the needed expertise to write for them. The latter is a writer who works without someone else’s brand certification. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Being a long-time journalist, it's not surprising that I have a bias in favor of brand certified writers. However, I do not think that certification means a writer is either better or worse than someone without it. It just means he or she is more experienced. Journalists make a lot of mistakes and people who are not or have not been paid to be journalists find and tell a lot of very good, fact-based stories. &lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;The wonderful thing about this interwebs with all its tubes and blogs is now everyone has a chance to find an audience for their writing. A lot of people are also finding out what journalists have a lot of experience with -- your credibility is your most important asset and it is always on the line.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">CollateralDamage</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 28 Jan 2008 13:39:41 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>