<?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: Creators and Content and Buzz, Oh My!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.kimwerker.com/2008/08/08/creators-and-content-and-buzz-oh-my/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.kimwerker.com/2008/08/08/creators-and-content-and-buzz-oh-my/</link>
	<description>Nothing is too precious to try at least once.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Mar 2010 16:30:08 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Recent Links Tagged With "oldmedia" - JabberTags</title>
		<link>http://www.kimwerker.com/2008/08/08/creators-and-content-and-buzz-oh-my/comment-page-1/#comment-4550</link>
		<dc:creator>Recent Links Tagged With "oldmedia" - JabberTags</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Dec 2008 00:34:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kimwerker.com/?p=207#comment-4550</guid>
		<description>[...] public links &gt;&gt; oldmedia   Creators and Content and Buzz, Oh My! Saved by coachm on Mon 15-12-2008   Think social networking is just for teens? Think again. Saved [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] public links &gt;&gt; oldmedia   Creators and Content and Buzz, Oh My! Saved by coachm on Mon 15-12-2008   Think social networking is just for teens? Think again. Saved [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Kim</title>
		<link>http://www.kimwerker.com/2008/08/08/creators-and-content-and-buzz-oh-my/comment-page-1/#comment-3685</link>
		<dc:creator>Kim</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2008 21:27:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kimwerker.com/?p=207#comment-3685</guid>
		<description>@&lt;a href=&quot;#comment-3621&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;vashti&lt;/a&gt;: Amen, sistah. Amen.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@<a href="#comment-3621" rel="nofollow">vashti</a>: Amen, sistah. Amen.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: vashti</title>
		<link>http://www.kimwerker.com/2008/08/08/creators-and-content-and-buzz-oh-my/comment-page-1/#comment-3621</link>
		<dc:creator>vashti</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Aug 2008 18:24:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.kimwerker.com/?p=207#comment-3621</guid>
		<description>Thought-provoking post in many ways! I enjoy David Brooks but his POV on this topic strikes me as being an entertaining version of that fuddy-duddy complaint about the internet--that it ruins the newer generations&#039; capacity for enjoying truly important content. (Partly because on the &#039;net the &quot;important&quot; stuff doesn&#039;t squeeze out other stuff, and partly because everyone&#039;s attention span is supposedly getting shorter, we&#039;re reading less, etc.)
I rejoice every day that the &#039;net leaves more gatekeepers behind in the dust! It collapses corrupt hierarchies! It foils vested interests! It unites the previously disenfranchised! I think the &#039;net is the best thing to happen to creatives and their works.
As a creative type, Brooks&#039; comment (in your post) has an odd ring to me. I think he has it backwards in fact! I find that creative work finally has a permanent presence thanks to the &#039;net, whereas buzz comes and goes. Buzz on the &#039;net is like a flame and it can flare into a wildfire in a day, or extinguish just as fast. Yes, a blaze of buzz becomes permanently recorded on the &#039;net, but fresh buzz is what matters because it&#039;s always on top.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thought-provoking post in many ways! I enjoy David Brooks but his POV on this topic strikes me as being an entertaining version of that fuddy-duddy complaint about the internet&#8211;that it ruins the newer generations&#8217; capacity for enjoying truly important content. (Partly because on the &#8216;net the &#8220;important&#8221; stuff doesn&#8217;t squeeze out other stuff, and partly because everyone&#8217;s attention span is supposedly getting shorter, we&#8217;re reading less, etc.)<br />
I rejoice every day that the &#8216;net leaves more gatekeepers behind in the dust! It collapses corrupt hierarchies! It foils vested interests! It unites the previously disenfranchised! I think the &#8216;net is the best thing to happen to creatives and their works.<br />
As a creative type, Brooks&#8217; comment (in your post) has an odd ring to me. I think he has it backwards in fact! I find that creative work finally has a permanent presence thanks to the &#8216;net, whereas buzz comes and goes. Buzz on the &#8216;net is like a flame and it can flare into a wildfire in a day, or extinguish just as fast. Yes, a blaze of buzz becomes permanently recorded on the &#8216;net, but fresh buzz is what matters because it&#8217;s always on top.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
