<?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: Forbes says we lie and cheat</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.webreakstuff.com/2005/10/forbes-says-we-lie-and-cheat/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.webreakstuff.com/2005/10/forbes-says-we-lie-and-cheat/</link>
	<description>A blog on entrepreneurship, user experience, and web innovation. Published by Fred Oliveira.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2011 18:19:07 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: The Corporate Stiffs Are Afraid Of Bloggers at connecting*the*dots</title>
		<link>http://blog.webreakstuff.com/2005/10/forbes-says-we-lie-and-cheat/comment-page-1/#comment-1115</link>
		<dc:creator>The Corporate Stiffs Are Afraid Of Bloggers at connecting*the*dots</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 17 Dec 2005 09:45:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.webreakstuff.com/?p=146#comment-1115</guid>
		<description>[...] UPDATE: Frederico is upset about this as well. And I found another one of these &quot;corporate boys are scared as hell&quot; articles. Check out The Mercury News article, &quot;An Internet fed mostly by amateurs is frightening.&quot; These hacks didn&#8217;t even treat the title correctly. Amateurs! Ha. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] UPDATE: Frederico is upset about this as well. And I found another one of these &quot;corporate boys are scared as hell&quot; articles. Check out The Mercury News article, &quot;An Internet fed mostly by amateurs is frightening.&quot; These hacks didn&#8217;t even treat the title correctly. Amateurs! Ha. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Blow</title>
		<link>http://blog.webreakstuff.com/2005/10/forbes-says-we-lie-and-cheat/comment-page-1/#comment-898</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Blow</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Nov 2005 15:46:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.webreakstuff.com/?p=146#comment-898</guid>
		<description>Anyone notice that Forbes actually has a 4-day-old blog? 

http://blogs.forbes.com/digitalrules/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Anyone notice that Forbes actually has a 4-day-old blog? </p>
<p><a href="http://blogs.forbes.com/digitalrules/" rel="nofollow">http://blogs.forbes.com/digitalrules/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick D</title>
		<link>http://blog.webreakstuff.com/2005/10/forbes-says-we-lie-and-cheat/comment-page-1/#comment-890</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick D</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2005 21:19:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.webreakstuff.com/?p=146#comment-890</guid>
		<description>It may help if i include the link.
http://www.podtech.net/?p=199</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It may help if i include the link.<br />
<a href="http://www.podtech.net/?p=199" rel="nofollow">http://www.podtech.net/?p=199</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Nick D</title>
		<link>http://blog.webreakstuff.com/2005/10/forbes-says-we-lie-and-cheat/comment-page-1/#comment-889</link>
		<dc:creator>Nick D</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Nov 2005 21:19:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.webreakstuff.com/?p=146#comment-889</guid>
		<description>Check out this podcast interview with Steve Forbes.  I am not sure if it was done before or after the article, but in this interview, Forbes seems to contradict what the article is saying.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Check out this podcast interview with Steve Forbes.  I am not sure if it was done before or after the article, but in this interview, Forbes seems to contradict what the article is saying.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Pete Cashmore</title>
		<link>http://blog.webreakstuff.com/2005/10/forbes-says-we-lie-and-cheat/comment-page-1/#comment-860</link>
		<dc:creator>Pete Cashmore</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Oct 2005 14:24:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.webreakstuff.com/?p=146#comment-860</guid>
		<description>I thought maybe the article was a parody - the hyperbole is hilarious.  But should we really get all riled up about this?  Perhaps we should just get back down to work.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I thought maybe the article was a parody &#8211; the hyperbole is hilarious.  But should we really get all riled up about this?  Perhaps we should just get back down to work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mean Dean</title>
		<link>http://blog.webreakstuff.com/2005/10/forbes-says-we-lie-and-cheat/comment-page-1/#comment-859</link>
		<dc:creator>Mean Dean</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Oct 2005 03:37:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.webreakstuff.com/?p=146#comment-859</guid>
		<description>Despicable? Yes, delightfully ripe for parody? You bet, as I spoofed their cover with my own.

Kidding aside, I think you&#039;re right with your terror remark - with no real news to report, they gin-up a story.

Shabby - even more so as it is Forbes, a periodical I _once_ respected.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Despicable? Yes, delightfully ripe for parody? You bet, as I spoofed their cover with my own.</p>
<p>Kidding aside, I think you&#8217;re right with your terror remark &#8211; with no real news to report, they gin-up a story.</p>
<p>Shabby &#8211; even more so as it is Forbes, a periodical I _once_ respected.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The English Guy &#187; Forbes&#8217; Blogger Bashing</title>
		<link>http://blog.webreakstuff.com/2005/10/forbes-says-we-lie-and-cheat/comment-page-1/#comment-857</link>
		<dc:creator>The English Guy &#187; Forbes&#8217; Blogger Bashing</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Oct 2005 01:52:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.webreakstuff.com/?p=146#comment-857</guid>
		<description>[...] the Technorati search results.                 Like this post for Del.icio.us, Furl, Spurl?        Trackback&#160;&#8226;&#160; Posted in life, blog, musings, politics on Friday October 28, 3:35 pm&#160; [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] the Technorati search results.                 Like this post for Del.icio.us, Furl, Spurl?        Trackback&nbsp;&bull;&nbsp; Posted in life, blog, musings, politics on Friday October 28, 3:35 pm&nbsp; [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chris Griffin</title>
		<link>http://blog.webreakstuff.com/2005/10/forbes-says-we-lie-and-cheat/comment-page-1/#comment-856</link>
		<dc:creator>Chris Griffin</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Oct 2005 01:07:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.webreakstuff.com/?p=146#comment-856</guid>
		<description>Bloggers have bashed Microsoft, CBS, CNN, ABC News, the maker of Kryptonite bike locks. and your point is?

It&#039;s not without reason that these companies get bashed. We all know why Microsoft gets bashed, CBS, CNN, ABC (what about FOX?) get bashed for going for ratings above all, the Krpytonite locks company I believe made the locks you can open with a cheap bic pen. I don&#039;t understand why they don&#039;t deserve it.

Maybe if we bash them more often they will get their shit together. Not likely, but we aren&#039;t under communist rule and we can say whatever the hell we want to say. Companies can no longer make crappy products without getting backlash on the internet. No corporation can get away with anything anymore without a blogger that has a 10,000+ readers saying something about it. I think we evened the playing field by blogging. We are sticking it to the man that has been able cover up their foul-ups in the past, but not anymore.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bloggers have bashed Microsoft, CBS, CNN, ABC News, the maker of Kryptonite bike locks. and your point is?</p>
<p>It&#8217;s not without reason that these companies get bashed. We all know why Microsoft gets bashed, CBS, CNN, ABC (what about FOX?) get bashed for going for ratings above all, the Krpytonite locks company I believe made the locks you can open with a cheap bic pen. I don&#8217;t understand why they don&#8217;t deserve it.</p>
<p>Maybe if we bash them more often they will get their shit together. Not likely, but we aren&#8217;t under communist rule and we can say whatever the hell we want to say. Companies can no longer make crappy products without getting backlash on the internet. No corporation can get away with anything anymore without a blogger that has a 10,000+ readers saying something about it. I think we evened the playing field by blogging. We are sticking it to the man that has been able cover up their foul-ups in the past, but not anymore.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sam</title>
		<link>http://blog.webreakstuff.com/2005/10/forbes-says-we-lie-and-cheat/comment-page-1/#comment-854</link>
		<dc:creator>Sam</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Oct 2005 00:05:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.webreakstuff.com/?p=146#comment-854</guid>
		<description>&quot;Yes, it is not only bad, it is slander.&quot;

(sorry, to clarify, I mean&#039;t is it bad that I think that.)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Yes, it is not only bad, it is slander.&#8221;</p>
<p>(sorry, to clarify, I mean&#8217;t is it bad that I think that.)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: mathewingram.com/work &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Revenge of the blog-o-sphere</title>
		<link>http://blog.webreakstuff.com/2005/10/forbes-says-we-lie-and-cheat/comment-page-1/#comment-852</link>
		<dc:creator>mathewingram.com/work &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Revenge of the blog-o-sphere</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 28 Oct 2005 21:43:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.webreakstuff.com/?p=146#comment-852</guid>
		<description>[...] If Forbes magazine was looking for some attention from the Internet, they certainly got what they were asking for. Unfortunately, it isn&#8217;t coming because of some fine-quality, well-written journalism, but because of what bloggers are taking as a drive-by-shooting style rant about how bloggers are dirty, rotten, lying scumbags. The piece by Daniel Lyons is more or less about a battle between one man whose company and stock were hammered by a blogger who pretended to be someone else, but along the way Lyons casts some aspersions against bloggers as a whole. Reaction (not surprisingly) has come from far and wide, including Dan Gillmor at Bayosphere, Steve Rubel at MicroPersuasion, the guys over at We Break Stuff and Paul Kedrosky at Infectious Greed. Is it a deliberate attempt by Forbes to get some coverage in the blog-o-sphere &#8212; even if it&#8217;s negative? Perhaps. Or it could just be that publisher Malcolm Forbes got a bee in his bonnet about blogs for some reason. Meanwhile, Chris Pirillo notes sarcastically that magazines also suffer from some of the same problems. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] If Forbes magazine was looking for some attention from the Internet, they certainly got what they were asking for. Unfortunately, it isn&#8217;t coming because of some fine-quality, well-written journalism, but because of what bloggers are taking as a drive-by-shooting style rant about how bloggers are dirty, rotten, lying scumbags. The piece by Daniel Lyons is more or less about a battle between one man whose company and stock were hammered by a blogger who pretended to be someone else, but along the way Lyons casts some aspersions against bloggers as a whole. Reaction (not surprisingly) has come from far and wide, including Dan Gillmor at Bayosphere, Steve Rubel at MicroPersuasion, the guys over at We Break Stuff and Paul Kedrosky at Infectious Greed. Is it a deliberate attempt by Forbes to get some coverage in the blog-o-sphere &#8212; even if it&#8217;s negative? Perhaps. Or it could just be that publisher Malcolm Forbes got a bee in his bonnet about blogs for some reason. Meanwhile, Chris Pirillo notes sarcastically that magazines also suffer from some of the same problems. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

