<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
    xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
     xmlns:admin="http://webns.net/mvcb/"
     xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
     xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
	<channel> 

	<title>Comments on: Tame Political Blogs</title>
	<link>http://www.metafilter.com/53742/Tame-Political-Blogs/</link>
	<description>Comments on MetaFilter post Tame Political Blogs</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:22:58 -0800</pubDate>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:22:58 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-us</language>
	<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
	<ttl>60</ttl>

	<item>
		<title>Tame Political Blogs</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/53742/Tame-Political-Blogs</link>	
		<description>&lt;a href="http://www.labour.org.uk/blogatconference"&gt;Official New Labour Blogs&lt;/a&gt; The US has got used to the political bloggers, but the Uk&apos;s Labour party is now accepting applications from bloggers to be an official blogger at their &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.labour.org.uk/conference2006&quot;&gt;Annual Conference&lt;/a&gt;. 

They&apos;re offering &lt;i&gt;access to all the key speeches and events at Conference and you&apos;ll be blogging from the floor about your experiences&lt;/i&gt; and &apos;special access&apos;.

Would a blogger be compromised by this?</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">post:www.metafilter.com,2006:site.53742</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:08:03 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>quarsan</dc:creator>		<category>labour</category>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: Zozo</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/53742/Tame-Political-Blogs#1396364</link>	
		<description>What&apos;s there to compromise? &quot;Blogger&apos;s integrity&quot;?</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2006:site.53742-1396364</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:22:58 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Zozo</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: luriete</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/53742/Tame-Political-Blogs#1396379</link>	
		<description>Would a journalist be compromised?</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2006:site.53742-1396379</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:30:17 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>luriete</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: pardonyou?</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/53742/Tame-Political-Blogs#1396392</link>	
		<description>Well, things aren&apos;t very clear from the announcement page.  Would the blog be located on &quot;labour.org.uk&quot;?  What are the criteria for selection?

My guess is that the person selected won&apos;t need to be &quot;compromised&quot; -- he or she will have already drank the Kool-Aid.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2006:site.53742-1396392</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:34:55 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>pardonyou?</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: alasdair</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/53742/Tame-Political-Blogs#1396411</link>	
		<description>He&apos;d better not be too critical: &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Wolfgang&quot; title=&quot;Wikipedia entry&quot;&gt;Walter Wolfgang&lt;/a&gt; shouted &quot;Nonsense&quot; in 2005 and was arrested under the Terrorism Act, allowing the Government (from this year) to hold you without trial for 28 days (unless someone doesn&apos;t like you, and decides to place you under &lt;a href=&quot;http://hrw.org/backgrounder/eca/uk0305/2.htm&quot; title=&quot;Human Rights Watch&quot;&gt;house arrest&lt;/a&gt;).</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2006:site.53742-1396411</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:46:48 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>alasdair</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: quarsan</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/53742/Tame-Political-Blogs#1396417</link>	
		<description>the difference isn&apos;t that bloggers are being asked to the conference/convention, but that the party is seeking to choose an official conference blogger.

that&apos;s a difference to practices i&apos;ve seen in the states and is nothing to do with allowing journalists, who, generallya re permitted as representatives of media.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2006:site.53742-1396417</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:49:59 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>quarsan</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: rhymer</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/53742/Tame-Political-Blogs#1396632</link>	
		<description>How odd - official blogger for the labour party. 

I&apos;d always thought that the reason political blogging wasn&apos;t as big in the UK was:1) Because politics isn&apos;t as polarised and emotive and therefore isn&apos;t as interesting 2) Although the general populace is probably somewhat better informed, we don&apos;t really have the kind of deep beltway wonks americans do 3) Blogging is generally less popular for a variety of reasons which are cultural (despite big brother, less of a confessional mindset) and technological (for many, the mobile is more important than the net).</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2006:site.53742-1396632</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2006 14:53:03 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>rhymer</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: Jimbob</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/53742/Tame-Political-Blogs#1396776</link>	
		<description>&lt;i&gt;1) Because politics isn&apos;t as polarised and emotive and therefore isn&apos;t as interesting&lt;/i&gt;

Aah, but if the British Labour party is anything like the Australian Labor Party, and I think it is, party discipline is all important.  I doubt they would pick somone who was going to give free, liberal and challenging analyis of the goings on.  

&lt;i&gt;the difference isn&apos;t that bloggers are being asked to the conference/convention, but that the party is seeking to choose an official conference blogger.&lt;/i&gt;

As well they might choose an official person to write their press releases or do their PR.  While I am prepared to accept that there may be some &lt;i&gt;overlap&lt;/i&gt; in the Venn diagram between bloggers and journalists, bloggers are &lt;i&gt;not&lt;/i&gt;, by default journalists.  To believe such is to ignore the history and original use of the term &quot;weblog&quot;. Hell, major companies now have &quot;weblogs&quot; intended to provide news about new products. How is this likely to be any different?

I second zozo&apos;s view.  In order to be compromised, surely you have to have some kind of integrity and respectability to begin with.  And if you did, you surely wouldn&apos;t take them up on the position.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2006:site.53742-1396776</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2006 17:20:57 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jimbob</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: delmoi</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/53742/Tame-Political-Blogs#1396787</link>	
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Aah, but if the British Labour party is anything like the Australian Labor Party, and I think it is, party discipline is all important. I doubt they would pick someone who was going to give free, liberal and challenging analysis of the goings on.&lt;/i&gt;

Isn&apos;t the AU Labor party basically what would be considered the American right wing? My impression of UK Labour was basically a bunch of Joe Lieberman/Hillary Clinton type democrats.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2006:site.53742-1396787</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2006 17:26:04 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>delmoi</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: Jimbob</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/53742/Tame-Political-Blogs#1396793</link>	
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Isn&apos;t the AU Labor party basically what would be considered the American right wing? &lt;/i&gt;

No, you&apos;re thinking of the Australian &lt;b&gt;Liberal&lt;/b&gt; party.  They&apos;re the ones with the confusing name. The Australian Labor party are centre-left unionists, vaguely corresponding to US Democrats and British Labour.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2006:site.53742-1396793</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2006 17:33:03 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jimbob</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: Jimbob</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/53742/Tame-Political-Blogs#1396796</link>	
		<description>However, fair call, they &lt;i&gt;are&lt;/i&gt; too right-wing for me to vote for them these days ;)</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2006:site.53742-1396796</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2006 17:35:30 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jimbob</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: pompomtom</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/53742/Tame-Political-Blogs#1396874</link>	
		<description>&lt;i&gt;However, fair call, they are too right-wing for me to vote for them these days ;)&lt;/i&gt;

Shall we once again revel in the ability to cast preferential votes?</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2006:site.53742-1396874</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2006 19:16:39 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>pompomtom</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: Wolof</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/53742/Tame-Political-Blogs#1396976</link>	
		<description>We shall.</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2006:site.53742-1396976</guid>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Aug 2006 22:11:45 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Wolof</dc:creator>
	</item>	<item>
		<title>By: teleskiving</title>
		<link>http://www.metafilter.com/53742/Tame-Political-Blogs#1398302</link>	
		<description>&lt;em&gt;He&apos;d better not be too critical&lt;/em&gt;

They are hardly going to be in a hurry to throw anyone out after the reaction to the Wolfgang incident last year (which culminated in his recent election to the &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Executive_Committee&quot;&gt;NEC&lt;/a&gt;!).</description>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">comment:www.metafilter.com,2006:site.53742-1398302</guid>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Aug 2006 05:30:10 -0800</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>teleskiving</dc:creator>
	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
