<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Technology Liberation Front - Latest Comments in Newspapers: The Bleeding Continues</title><link>http://tlf.disqus.com/</link><description>The Technology Liberation Front is the tech policy blog dedicated to keeping politicians' hands off the 'net and everything else related to technology.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Mar 2007 13:27:00 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Newspapers: The Bleeding Continues</title><link>http://techliberation.com/2007/02/28/newspapers-the-bleeding-continues/#comment-1449980</link><description>Aggregators aren't inherently parasitic, as they do drive traffic back to the host sites. But sites that copy whole articles, or summarize without linking, are a different kettle of fish.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Tim, please update your post as you've misstated my characterization of Craig's List.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">BubbaDude</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 01 Mar 2007 13:27:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Newspapers: The Bleeding Continues</title><link>http://techliberation.com/2007/02/28/newspapers-the-bleeding-continues/#comment-1449979</link><description>Those "parasite" aggregator sites don't do anything but hurt original news providers?  That's why all those "digg this story" links are popping up everywhere, and why news organizations are paying big bucks to SEO companies in an effort to improve their Google News rankings.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Doug Lay</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 01 Mar 2007 06:37:12 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Newspapers: The Bleeding Continues</title><link>http://techliberation.com/2007/02/28/newspapers-the-bleeding-continues/#comment-1449983</link><description>The interesting thing is that I never characterized Craig's List as a "parasitic web site," that's your own bizarre imagination at work.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;A parasitic web site is one that derives its content entirely from other web sites, and does nothing for them in return. Craig's List doesn't fit that category because it has no particular relationship to any other web site, it just offers up its ads for free and that's the end of it.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;But we have an explosion of web sites that exist to summarize and pass on the news reported by working journalists, and many of them do nothing for the host; they're like tapeworms.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;And just as there are parasites in the real world there are parasites on the Web. And no, that doesn't mean that every web site is a parasite, just that some are. And that's a second problem that investigative journalism faces.&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;Is it clear now?</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">BubbaDude</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 01 Mar 2007 00:41:34 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Newspapers: The Bleeding Continues</title><link>http://techliberation.com/2007/02/28/newspapers-the-bleeding-continues/#comment-1449982</link><description>Richard, the bizarre part is the "parasitic" comment.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Tim Lee</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 28 Feb 2007 22:14:10 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Newspapers: The Bleeding Continues</title><link>http://techliberation.com/2007/02/28/newspapers-the-bleeding-continues/#comment-1449981</link><description>It's "bizarre" to say that newspapers are losing classified ad revenues to Craig's List?&lt;br&gt;&lt;br&gt;What planet are you on, space cowboy? Everybody knows that's happening.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">BubbaDude</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 28 Feb 2007 22:03:59 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>