<?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 for Bill Doskoch: Media, BPS*, Film, Minutiae</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.billdoskoch.ca/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.billdoskoch.ca</link>
	<description>Curated knowlege, trenchant insights &#38; witty bon mots</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 May 2012 21:23:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on About those digital riches for newspapers by &#8216;Globe and Mail&#8217; to introduce metered paywall &#124; Bill Doskoch: Media, BPS*, Film, Minutiae</title>
		<link>http://www.billdoskoch.ca/2012/05/09/canada-newspapers-digital-revenues/comment-page-1/#comment-7977</link>
		<dc:creator>&#8216;Globe and Mail&#8217; to introduce metered paywall &#124; Bill Doskoch: Media, BPS*, Film, Minutiae</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 May 2012 21:23:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.billdoskoch.ca/?p=13268#comment-7977</guid>
		<description>[...] clearly, newspapers feel relying on advertising alone isn&#8217;t cutting it on the revenue [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] clearly, newspapers feel relying on advertising alone isn&#8217;t cutting it on the revenue [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Stafford trial: How much information is too much? by Bill D</title>
		<link>http://www.billdoskoch.ca/2012/03/16/stafford-rafferty-trial-news-coverage/comment-page-1/#comment-7923</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill D</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Mar 2012 19:06:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.billdoskoch.ca/?p=13020#comment-7923</guid>
		<description>You&#039;re quite welcome, Sarah. Thanks for a solid story on the issue.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You&#8217;re quite welcome, Sarah. Thanks for a solid story on the issue.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The Stafford trial: How much information is too much? by Sarah</title>
		<link>http://www.billdoskoch.ca/2012/03/16/stafford-rafferty-trial-news-coverage/comment-page-1/#comment-7922</link>
		<dc:creator>Sarah</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Mar 2012 17:54:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.billdoskoch.ca/?p=13020#comment-7922</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the shoutout, Bill. It&#039;s much appreciated.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the shoutout, Bill. It&#8217;s much appreciated.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Dear anonymous critic by Bill D</title>
		<link>http://www.billdoskoch.ca/2012/03/15/dear-bill-doskoch-anonymous-blog/comment-page-1/#comment-7918</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill D</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Mar 2012 22:04:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.billdoskoch.ca/?p=12984#comment-7918</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the kind words, CQ.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the kind words, CQ.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Dear anonymous critic by CQ</title>
		<link>http://www.billdoskoch.ca/2012/03/15/dear-bill-doskoch-anonymous-blog/comment-page-1/#comment-7917</link>
		<dc:creator>CQ</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 18 Mar 2012 16:12:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.billdoskoch.ca/?p=12984#comment-7917</guid>
		<description>I haven&#039;t &quot;known&quot; nor personally socialized with you.  I have, though, enjoyed following along with your blog postings, more and (yes) at times less actively, over a number of online years.
So I&#039;ll just belatedly add my own expressions of sympathy towards your challenging of any personal health concerns.
I wish you well.  I&#039;ve met my own share of wide-ranging disappointment stemming from a lack of &#039;actually stated&#039; communication(s), too.  And I&#039;ll also wish the anon critic well.  Hopefully, she (or a he) might better contact you, privately, one day.
Take care and keep strong.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I haven&#8217;t &#8220;known&#8221; nor personally socialized with you.  I have, though, enjoyed following along with your blog postings, more and (yes) at times less actively, over a number of online years.<br />
So I&#8217;ll just belatedly add my own expressions of sympathy towards your challenging of any personal health concerns.<br />
I wish you well.  I&#8217;ve met my own share of wide-ranging disappointment stemming from a lack of &#8216;actually stated&#8217; communication(s), too.  And I&#8217;ll also wish the anon critic well.  Hopefully, she (or a he) might better contact you, privately, one day.<br />
Take care and keep strong.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Tweeting the Tori Stafford trial by The Stafford trial: How much information is too much? &#124; Bill Doskoch: Media, BPS*, Film, Minutiae</title>
		<link>http://www.billdoskoch.ca/2012/03/14/twitter-journalism-tori-stafford-trial/comment-page-1/#comment-7909</link>
		<dc:creator>The Stafford trial: How much information is too much? &#124; Bill Doskoch: Media, BPS*, Film, Minutiae</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 16 Mar 2012 18:53:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.billdoskoch.ca/?p=12965#comment-7909</guid>
		<description>[...] For additional reading, see my March 14 post: Tweeting the Tori Stafford trial. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] For additional reading, see my March 14 post: Tweeting the Tori Stafford trial. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Tweeting the Tori Stafford trial by Bill D</title>
		<link>http://www.billdoskoch.ca/2012/03/14/twitter-journalism-tori-stafford-trial/comment-page-1/#comment-7904</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill D</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2012 16:52:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.billdoskoch.ca/?p=12965#comment-7904</guid>
		<description>Hi Sarah:

Unfortunately, it&#039;s all relative.

With respects to questioning the parents as they entered and exited court, Rodney Stafford has been quite willing to speak with the media.

Tara McDonald, Tori&#039;s mom, hasn&#039;t been quoted. She has been filmed entering the courthouse, but only a few seconds of that footage ran in the CTV video story.

I don&#039;t think merely asking questions of the victim&#039;s parents, if they&#039;re willing to speak, is inherently insensitive. Badgering them if they clearly don&#039;t want to talk is in bad taste.

I didn&#039;t do screen grabs, but the Toronto Star&#039;s final story online was more toned down in terms of detail than the mid-day version.

I&#039;m not sure what to say about your last point, but what I read last night seemed to get the balance right.

Cheers
Bill D.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Sarah:</p>
<p>Unfortunately, it&#8217;s all relative.</p>
<p>With respects to questioning the parents as they entered and exited court, Rodney Stafford has been quite willing to speak with the media.</p>
<p>Tara McDonald, Tori&#8217;s mom, hasn&#8217;t been quoted. She has been filmed entering the courthouse, but only a few seconds of that footage ran in the CTV video story.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think merely asking questions of the victim&#8217;s parents, if they&#8217;re willing to speak, is inherently insensitive. Badgering them if they clearly don&#8217;t want to talk is in bad taste.</p>
<p>I didn&#8217;t do screen grabs, but the Toronto Star&#8217;s final story online was more toned down in terms of detail than the mid-day version.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not sure what to say about your last point, but what I read last night seemed to get the balance right.</p>
<p>Cheers<br />
Bill D.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Tweeting the Tori Stafford trial by Sarah</title>
		<link>http://www.billdoskoch.ca/2012/03/14/twitter-journalism-tori-stafford-trial/comment-page-1/#comment-7903</link>
		<dc:creator>Sarah</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Mar 2012 13:18:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.billdoskoch.ca/?p=12965#comment-7903</guid>
		<description>I don&#039;t know that there is an answer to your question there, Bill. 

Can any of these pieces be &quot;the most sensitive,&quot; given the circumstances of the case?

How do we measure sensitivity: Who didn&#039;t bombard Tori&#039;s parents pre- and post-court yesterday? Who left out certain details? Who made the story more about Tory than McClintic?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I don&#8217;t know that there is an answer to your question there, Bill. </p>
<p>Can any of these pieces be &#8220;the most sensitive,&#8221; given the circumstances of the case?</p>
<p>How do we measure sensitivity: Who didn&#8217;t bombard Tori&#8217;s parents pre- and post-court yesterday? Who left out certain details? Who made the story more about Tory than McClintic?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The new world of open journalism by Bill D</title>
		<link>http://www.billdoskoch.ca/2012/03/08/open-journalism-guardian/comment-page-1/#comment-7886</link>
		<dc:creator>Bill D</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Mar 2012 23:10:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.billdoskoch.ca/?p=12947#comment-7886</guid>
		<description>Hi Wayne:

Thanks for stopping by.

I guess my tone was prompted by a belief that many journalists sigh and say to themselves, &quot;Why can&#039;t we be more like the Guardian?&quot;

Economic structure is part of the reason why, one that doesn&#039;t get mentioned in these debates.

The Guardian isn&#039;t alone in facing economic troubles. The shrinkage in U.S. newspaper revenues is astounding.

I&#039;m not sure if the situation in Canada is as dire. Maybe we have better-run papers or that our time of reckoning isn&#039;t fully here yet. That being said, major papers such as La Presse and the Toronto Star have suffered serious cuts; how much of that is recession-driven vs. structural is something I can&#039;t say.

In any event, I would agree the future is digital. It&#039;s a question of how best to get there, meaning with the least pain. You could be right that many newspaper companies have been too slow and conservative.

I remember suggesting to a Toronto Star person that its online classified should be beefed up. &quot;Why?&quot; he asked. Well, because you charge money while Craigslist is free, and Craigslist is better.

During his speech in Toronto, Digital First Media CEO John Paton blasted, as he put it, lousy newspaper executives who have done more to harm the industry than anything the Internet has wrought.

I&#039;m supportive of open journalism. I just think that a trust newspaper has more room for experimentation -- and that fact should be noted.

Your explanation that the move is borne of urgency might be more valid, but I would note you can be closed and digital (look at Apple).

In any event, thanks for the opportunity to converse on this.

Bill D.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Wayne:</p>
<p>Thanks for stopping by.</p>
<p>I guess my tone was prompted by a belief that many journalists sigh and say to themselves, &#8220;Why can&#8217;t we be more like the Guardian?&#8221;</p>
<p>Economic structure is part of the reason why, one that doesn&#8217;t get mentioned in these debates.</p>
<p>The Guardian isn&#8217;t alone in facing economic troubles. The shrinkage in U.S. newspaper revenues is astounding.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m not sure if the situation in Canada is as dire. Maybe we have better-run papers or that our time of reckoning isn&#8217;t fully here yet. That being said, major papers such as La Presse and the Toronto Star have suffered serious cuts; how much of that is recession-driven vs. structural is something I can&#8217;t say.</p>
<p>In any event, I would agree the future is digital. It&#8217;s a question of how best to get there, meaning with the least pain. You could be right that many newspaper companies have been too slow and conservative.</p>
<p>I remember suggesting to a Toronto Star person that its online classified should be beefed up. &#8220;Why?&#8221; he asked. Well, because you charge money while Craigslist is free, and Craigslist is better.</p>
<p>During his speech in Toronto, Digital First Media CEO John Paton blasted, as he put it, lousy newspaper executives who have done more to harm the industry than anything the Internet has wrought.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m supportive of open journalism. I just think that a trust newspaper has more room for experimentation &#8212; and that fact should be noted.</p>
<p>Your explanation that the move is borne of urgency might be more valid, but I would note you can be closed and digital (look at Apple).</p>
<p>In any event, thanks for the opportunity to converse on this.</p>
<p>Bill D.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on The new world of open journalism by Wayne MacPhail</title>
		<link>http://www.billdoskoch.ca/2012/03/08/open-journalism-guardian/comment-page-1/#comment-7885</link>
		<dc:creator>Wayne MacPhail</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Mar 2012 21:29:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.billdoskoch.ca/?p=12947#comment-7885</guid>
		<description>Hi Bill:
Thanks for your thoughts. I&#039;m not certain that The Guardian is alone among newspapers that are not making money, not making enough money for its shareholders or losing print revenues faster than digital gains. A lot of papers are in the same boat. The Guardian, at least, is jumping feet first into a digital future. That&#039;s superior I think to a grumpy, grudging attitude exhibited by a lot of papers. Not sure what you&#039;re arguing for here. Better that the Guardian didn&#039;t adopt an Open Journalism stance? Or, since it doesn&#039;t have to make money it can do it blithely? I get the sense, on the contrary, the shift was made out of urgency and with due consideration. I wish the same fire was lit under the butts of other publishers.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Bill:<br />
Thanks for your thoughts. I&#8217;m not certain that The Guardian is alone among newspapers that are not making money, not making enough money for its shareholders or losing print revenues faster than digital gains. A lot of papers are in the same boat. The Guardian, at least, is jumping feet first into a digital future. That&#8217;s superior I think to a grumpy, grudging attitude exhibited by a lot of papers. Not sure what you&#8217;re arguing for here. Better that the Guardian didn&#8217;t adopt an Open Journalism stance? Or, since it doesn&#8217;t have to make money it can do it blithely? I get the sense, on the contrary, the shift was made out of urgency and with due consideration. I wish the same fire was lit under the butts of other publishers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

