<?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: Why The Public Doesn’t Deserve The News</title>
	<atom:link href="http://adrianmonck.com/2007/02/why-the-public-doesnt-deserve-the-news/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://adrianmonck.com/2007/02/why-the-public-doesnt-deserve-the-news/</link>
	<description>a blog about news and stuff</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Feb 2012 18:16:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adrian Monck</title>
		<link>http://adrianmonck.com/2007/02/why-the-public-doesnt-deserve-the-news/comment-page-1/#comment-160</link>
		<dc:creator>Adrian Monck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Apr 2007 03:29:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://adrianmonck.com/?p=268#comment-160</guid>
		<description>Political opinion tends to seek confirmatory information. What interests me is the way that gets reframed over time, e.g. the information battle in the 16C was over giving people access to the Bible to stop them falling into superstition, or withholding access to stop them falling into heresy. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Claims for the transformatory power of social information packaged up as news are, I fear, much over-rated. It seems much easier to understand as a reframing of arguments that go back to the atomistic impact of the print media - which transforms people into readers and also isolates them.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Still I&#039;m not apolitical - hence my book - I just think we need a healthy dose of realism about our motivations and I&#039;d rather try and rationalise them than romanticise them. (But that too could be just a frustrating psychological trope!)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Political opinion tends to seek confirmatory information. What interests me is the way that gets reframed over time, e.g. the information battle in the 16C was over giving people access to the Bible to stop them falling into superstition, or withholding access to stop them falling into heresy. </p>
<p>Claims for the transformatory power of social information packaged up as news are, I fear, much over-rated. It seems much easier to understand as a reframing of arguments that go back to the atomistic impact of the print media — which transforms people into readers and also isolates them.</p>
<p>Still I’m not apolitical — hence my book — I just think we need a healthy dose of realism about our motivations and I’d rather try and rationalise them than romanticise them. (But that too could be just a frustrating psychological trope!)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ron Davison</title>
		<link>http://adrianmonck.com/2007/02/why-the-public-doesnt-deserve-the-news/comment-page-1/#comment-159</link>
		<dc:creator>Ron Davison</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 13 Apr 2007 13:54:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://adrianmonck.com/?p=268#comment-159</guid>
		<description>Adrian

Don&#039;t you suppose that decision-making follows the distribution of information? Bibles in every home and a few centuries later, members of every home decide whether or not to believe it or how. Apostasy, too, is a choice. Perhaps it is the same thing with politics. To sing the apolitical blues like Lowell George is, of course, a choice.

And by the way, I&#039;m not making these comments to dismiss what you&#039;ve written but, rather, because I find it thought-provoking.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Adrian</p>
<p>Don’t you suppose that decision-making follows the distribution of information? Bibles in every home and a few centuries later, members of every home decide whether or not to believe it or how. Apostasy, too, is a choice. Perhaps it is the same thing with politics. To sing the apolitical blues like Lowell George is, of course, a choice.</p>
<p>And by the way, I’m not making these comments to dismiss what you’ve written but, rather, because I find it thought-provoking.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adrian Monck</title>
		<link>http://adrianmonck.com/2007/02/why-the-public-doesnt-deserve-the-news/comment-page-1/#comment-152</link>
		<dc:creator>Adrian Monck</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2007 21:51:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://adrianmonck.com/?p=268#comment-152</guid>
		<description>Thanks Ron. I guess I meant the moral revolution, rather than the religious revolutions of Protestantism and the Counter-Reformation.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks Ron. I guess I meant the moral revolution, rather than the religious revolutions of Protestantism and the Counter-Reformation.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ron Davison</title>
		<link>http://adrianmonck.com/2007/02/why-the-public-doesnt-deserve-the-news/comment-page-1/#comment-151</link>
		<dc:creator>Ron Davison</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Apr 2007 21:18:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://adrianmonck.com/?p=268#comment-151</guid>
		<description>I quite enjoyed this posting, thanks. Enjoyed it even though I&#039;m one of those odd folks who believe that the news does make a difference to politics. You cite the emphasis on scripture as if it didn&#039;t help to trigger a religious revolution. Things have changed greatly since Wyclif&#039;s time. The fact that it didn&#039;t exactly change in the direction he would have predicted doesn&#039;t undermine the importance of that change.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I quite enjoyed this posting, thanks. Enjoyed it even though I’m one of those odd folks who believe that the news does make a difference to politics. You cite the emphasis on scripture as if it didn’t help to trigger a religious revolution. Things have changed greatly since Wyclif’s time. The fact that it didn’t exactly change in the direction he would have predicted doesn’t undermine the importance of that change.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Newman</title>
		<link>http://adrianmonck.com/2007/02/why-the-public-doesnt-deserve-the-news/comment-page-1/#comment-76</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Newman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 14 Feb 2007 10:53:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://adrianmonck.com/?p=268#comment-76</guid>
		<description>You are making a simple point and seem at pains to make it at as great a length and with as many superfluous name drops as possible. It&#039;s rather alienating  and you only succeed in making the transparent opaque..still it is still an interesting area.&lt;br/&gt; &lt;br/&gt;Oddly enough both I and Arthurs legend, two islington Bloggers have dealt with not dissimiliar  subjects recently.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You are making a simple point and seem at pains to make it at as great a length and with as many superfluous name drops as possible. It’s rather alienating  and you only succeed in making the transparent opaque..still it is still an interesting area.</p>
<p>Oddly enough both I and Arthurs legend, two islington Bloggers have dealt with not dissimiliar  subjects recently.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

