<?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: MediaGuardian: What did British media look like in 1984?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/2009/05/18/mediaguardian-what-did-british-media-look-like-in-1984/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/2009/05/18/mediaguardian-what-did-british-media-look-like-in-1984/</link>
	<description>Online journalism news</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Jan 2012 19:16:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Could the Monday MediaGuardian section go online-only? &#124; Journalism.co.uk Editors' Blog</title>
		<link>http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/2009/05/18/mediaguardian-what-did-british-media-look-like-in-1984/comment-page-1/#comment-18996</link>
		<dc:creator>Could the Monday MediaGuardian section go online-only? &#124; Journalism.co.uk Editors' Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Oct 2009 09:20:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/?p=10374#comment-18996</guid>
		<description>[...] recently celebrated its 25th birthday in print and is read by 525,000 readers every week, according to its advertising information; online it [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] recently celebrated its 25th birthday in print and is read by 525,000 readers every week, according to its advertising information; online it [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

