<?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"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Should Reporters Have Private Blogs? Sure.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.markevanstech.com/2008/01/24/should-reporters-have-private-blogs-sure/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.markevanstech.com/2008/01/24/should-reporters-have-private-blogs-sure/</link>
	<description>A Canadian Take on the Web</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 09:32:34 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mark Dykeman</title>
		<link>http://www.markevanstech.com/2008/01/24/should-reporters-have-private-blogs-sure/#comment-40803</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark Dykeman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Jan 2008 18:53:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.markevanstech.com/2008/01/24/should-reporters-have-private-blogs-sure/#comment-40803</guid>
		<description>Mark, I have a different take on this situation.

First, the journalist, Will Leitch, wrote the blog post about Cuban at Valleywag as a sort of guest post, not at his own blog.  I'm not that familiar with Valleywag, but I doubt it could be considered Leitch's private blog, despite his affiliation with Deadspin.

Second, the post wasn't centered around the fact that Leitch interviewed Cuban, it was centered around Leitch's opinion that Cuban would never stand a chance of being able to buy a Major League Baseball team (at least that's my take on Leitch's post.)

I would say that Cuban would be more angry about the implication that he couldn't join an old boys club than the fact that the report chose to wrote a blog post about him without asking.  I wager that Cuban might be using this so-called betrayal of trust as an excuse.  I doubt Cuban would have complained if Leitch's blog post was more charitable.

In principle, I don't think there's an issue with a journalist commenting on their own work in their own private sandbox.  I just don't think this scenario was a good example of that.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Mark, I have a different take on this situation.</p>
<p>First, the journalist, Will Leitch, wrote the blog post about Cuban at Valleywag as a sort of guest post, not at his own blog.  I&#8217;m not that familiar with Valleywag, but I doubt it could be considered Leitch&#8217;s private blog, despite his affiliation with Deadspin.</p>
<p>Second, the post wasn&#8217;t centered around the fact that Leitch interviewed Cuban, it was centered around Leitch&#8217;s opinion that Cuban would never stand a chance of being able to buy a Major League Baseball team (at least that&#8217;s my take on Leitch&#8217;s post.)</p>
<p>I would say that Cuban would be more angry about the implication that he couldn&#8217;t join an old boys club than the fact that the report chose to wrote a blog post about him without asking.  I wager that Cuban might be using this so-called betrayal of trust as an excuse.  I doubt Cuban would have complained if Leitch&#8217;s blog post was more charitable.</p>
<p>In principle, I don&#8217;t think there&#8217;s an issue with a journalist commenting on their own work in their own private sandbox.  I just don&#8217;t think this scenario was a good example of that.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
