<?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: BusinessWeek.com revises 2005 article on blogs because of &#8216;longtail&#8217; traffic</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/2008/05/28/businessweekcom-revises-2005-article-on-blogs-because-of-longtail-traffic/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/2008/05/28/businessweekcom-revises-2005-article-on-blogs-because-of-longtail-traffic/</link>
	<description>Online journalism news</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 May 2012 14:01:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: That&#8217;s What I Call A Rewrite Desk: A Timeless Blogging Story &#171; Source Notes</title>
		<link>http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/2008/05/28/businessweekcom-revises-2005-article-on-blogs-because-of-longtail-traffic/comment-page-1/#comment-5219</link>
		<dc:creator>That&#8217;s What I Call A Rewrite Desk: A Timeless Blogging Story &#171; Source Notes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 05:20:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2008/05/28/businessweekcom-revises-2005-article-on-blogs-because-of-longtail-traffic/#comment-5219</guid>
		<description>[...] interesting story justice. But the larger point is, when you have a top listing on Google, that means something, enough to rework a story that you presumably would otherwise have no reason to update.     Posted [...]

[WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The comment&#039;s server IP (66.135.48.143) doesn&#039;t match the comment&#039;s URL host IP (72.232.101.42) and so is spam.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] interesting story justice. But the larger point is, when you have a top listing on Google, that means something, enough to rework a story that you presumably would otherwise have no reason to update.     Posted [...]</p>
<p>[WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The comment&#8217;s server IP (66.135.48.143) doesn&#8217;t match the comment&#8217;s URL host IP (72.232.101.42) and so is spam.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: links for 2008-05-28 &#124; James Mitchell</title>
		<link>http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/2008/05/28/businessweekcom-revises-2005-article-on-blogs-because-of-longtail-traffic/comment-page-1/#comment-5218</link>
		<dc:creator>links for 2008-05-28 &#124; James Mitchell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 28 May 2008 23:45:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2008/05/28/businessweekcom-revises-2005-article-on-blogs-because-of-longtail-traffic/#comment-5218</guid>
		<description>[...] BusinessWeek.com revises 2005 article on blogs because of &#8216;longtail&#8217; traffic BusinessWeek.com has looked to data from its web traffic to update a story originally published in 2005 (pointed out by The Bivings Report). (tags: online+journalism newspaper+websites long+tail) [...]

[WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The comment&#039;s actual post text did not contain your blog url (http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2008/05/28/businessweekcom-revises-2005-article-on-blogs-because-of-longtail-traffic) and so is spam.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] BusinessWeek.com revises 2005 article on blogs because of &#8216;longtail&#8217; traffic BusinessWeek.com has looked to data from its web traffic to update a story originally published in 2005 (pointed out by The Bivings Report). (tags: online+journalism newspaper+websites long+tail) [...]</p>
<p>[WORDPRESS HASHCASH] The comment&#8217;s actual post text did not contain your blog url (<a href="http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2008/05/28/businessweekcom-revises-2005-article-on-blogs-because-of-longtail-traffic" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2008/05/28/businessweekcom-revises-2005-article-on-blogs-because-of-longtail-traffic</a>) and so is spam.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

