<?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: Telegraph.co.uk inserting keywords to drive traffic?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2008/07/14/telegraphcouk-inserting-keywords-to-drive-traffic/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2008/07/14/telegraphcouk-inserting-keywords-to-drive-traffic/</link>
	<description>Online journalism news</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 17:39:17 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Laura Oliver</title>
		<link>http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2008/07/14/telegraphcouk-inserting-keywords-to-drive-traffic/comment-page-1/#comment-5942</link>
		<dc:creator>Laura Oliver</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2008 14:35:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/?p=1506#comment-5942</guid>
		<description>As an update - Shane Richmond, communities editor of Telegraph.co.uk, has eloquently explained the site&#039;s SEO policy.

http://www.journalism.co.uk/shorturl/QNPSY/

Any keywords are relevant keywords, he explains, and not exaggerated inserts as suggested - tongue-in-cheekily- by Private Eye.

But where has the Observer&#039;s evidence of accusations come from or is taking PE too seriously?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As an update &#8211; Shane Richmond, communities editor of Telegraph.co.uk, has eloquently explained the site&#8217;s SEO policy.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.journalism.co.uk/shorturl/QNPSY/" rel="nofollow">http://www.journalism.co.uk/shorturl/QNPSY/</a></p>
<p>Any keywords are relevant keywords, he explains, and not exaggerated inserts as suggested &#8211; tongue-in-cheekily- by Private Eye.</p>
<p>But where has the Observer&#8217;s evidence of accusations come from or is taking PE too seriously?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: "Redaktionen skriver utifrån populäraste sökorden" &#124; Bloggtidningen</title>
		<link>http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/2008/07/14/telegraphcouk-inserting-keywords-to-drive-traffic/comment-page-1/#comment-5915</link>
		<dc:creator>"Redaktionen skriver utifrån populäraste sökorden" &#124; Bloggtidningen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Jul 2008 19:48:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.journalism.co.uk/editors/?p=1506#comment-5915</guid>
		<description>[...] Här en blogg om journalistik som också tar upp frågan om Telegraph verkligen skriver med utgångspunkt från de vanligaste sökorden. As this appears in Private Eye the usual caveats apply, but similar practices at the Telegraph have been suggested by the Observer’s media diary: [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Här en blogg om journalistik som också tar upp frågan om Telegraph verkligen skriver med utgångspunkt från de vanligaste sökorden. As this appears in Private Eye the usual caveats apply, but similar practices at the Telegraph have been suggested by the Observer’s media diary: [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
