<?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/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
xmlns:rawvoice="http://www.rawvoice.com/rawvoiceRssModule/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Before Rove, Atwater</title>
	<atom:link href="http://citizenreporter.org/2008/11/before-rove-atwater/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://citizenreporter.org/2008/11/before-rove-atwater/</link>
	<description>Under-reported news by a Portuguese-American, activist-journalist based in Amsterdam.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 16:21:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: dave</title>
		<link>http://citizenreporter.org/2008/11/before-rove-atwater/comment-page-1/#comment-164411</link>
		<dc:creator>dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2008 14:28:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://citizenreporter.org/?p=1541#comment-164411</guid>
		<description>This last election is a kind of example of &quot;grassroots direct-to-the-people style politics.&quot; The question we should be asking is why was it a &quot;return.&quot; I think a big part of that was access, that is to say, the Obama people could reach regular folks and those people could respond in turn. A lot of talk is going on about how the Obama campaign was so tech savvy this and text message that. What is not addressed is that Obama found ways for the people to become involved that incorporated media systems not yet under the control of government or monolithic conglomerates or MSM outlets in the pocket of current regimes. The Right Wing here has always been more concerned about the 2nd Amendment than the 1st, so it is not surprising that the &quot;Fourth Estate&quot; is either disenfranchised or made toothless under conservative governments.  Add to that mix the fact that rampant capitalism has destroyed a great deal of independent thought in the media and we get the bleak landscape of inaccessible, irrelevant media we have today.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This last election is a kind of example of &#8220;grassroots direct-to-the-people style politics.&#8221; The question we should be asking is why was it a &#8220;return.&#8221; I think a big part of that was access, that is to say, the Obama people could reach regular folks and those people could respond in turn. A lot of talk is going on about how the Obama campaign was so tech savvy this and text message that. What is not addressed is that Obama found ways for the people to become involved that incorporated media systems not yet under the control of government or monolithic conglomerates or MSM outlets in the pocket of current regimes. The Right Wing here has always been more concerned about the 2nd Amendment than the 1st, so it is not surprising that the &#8220;Fourth Estate&#8221; is either disenfranchised or made toothless under conservative governments.  Add to that mix the fact that rampant capitalism has destroyed a great deal of independent thought in the media and we get the bleak landscape of inaccessible, irrelevant media we have today.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

