<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Mathew's comments - Latest Comments in HuffPo wants to be a newspaper</title><link>http://mathewingram.disqus.com/</link><description></description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2008 18:46:35 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: HuffPo wants to be a newspaper</title><link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2008/06/24/huffpo-wants-to-be-a-newspaper/#comment-741448</link><description>Agreed. False objectivity in the name of balance is dangerous. Often, that leads to distortion of the truth, which is not only a barrier to understanding, but a threat to democracy.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">shafqat</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2008 18:46:35 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: HuffPo wants to be a newspaper</title><link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2008/06/24/huffpo-wants-to-be-a-newspaper/#comment-741386</link><description>Thanks for the comment, Shafqat. I actually think Arianna and I are&lt;br&gt;both right :-) I think the point she's making is that in some cases, a&lt;br&gt;false objectivity is actually a barrier to understanding, and strong&lt;br&gt;opinion can be a good solution. But I don't think she would be opposed&lt;br&gt;to fairness or balance, which I think is a slightly different thing.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">mathewi</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2008 18:37:06 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: HuffPo wants to be a newspaper</title><link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2008/06/24/huffpo-wants-to-be-a-newspaper/#comment-741347</link><description>Nice post. I found it quite interesting that you did exactly what Arianna was calling out: presenting both sides of the story without taking a delilberate stance. I don't necessarily agree that her propsal for a new kind of media (one that does not present objectivity) is correct. But the fact that you presented her views and then linked to an equally opposing view was a reflection of how journalism works today. Is that kind of neutrality a bad thing? Quite the opposite - you're presenting the facts and the necessary information, I can work out an opinion.</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">shafqat</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2008 18:30:49 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>