<?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: Chicago Reader Goes the Way of Clear Channel and Leverage Is the Culprit</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mediageek.net/2009/08/chicago-reader-goes-the-way-of-clear-channel-and-leverage-is-the-culprit/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mediageek.net/2009/08/chicago-reader-goes-the-way-of-clear-channel-and-leverage-is-the-culprit/</link>
	<description>&#34;Eclectic&#34; is just a nice way of saying, &#34;lacking focus&#34;</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Feb 2012 21:13:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: James Samuel</title>
		<link>http://www.mediageek.net/2009/08/chicago-reader-goes-the-way-of-clear-channel-and-leverage-is-the-culprit/comment-page-1/#comment-243299</link>
		<dc:creator>James Samuel</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jan 2010 14:20:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mediageek.net/?p=2021#comment-243299</guid>
		<description>Not much has changed at the Reader, so being owned by a private equity firm doesn&#039;t appear to be that big of a deal (at least it has money). Speaking purely as a longtime Reader reader: I think the paper&#039;s troubles started when they stopped publishing interesting stories, say, around a decade ago. I&#039;m not just talking about the often-long cover stories -- I&#039;m talking about all the little stories, too, the ones that appeared on the spread with the numbered events and the Our Towns. The editors/owners obviously made a choice to become another arts-and-culture rag, like hundreds of other alternative newsweeklies. Creative Loafing apparently had no idea it had purchased damaged goods and then proceeded to make a bad situation worse. Thankfully, the Reader still has Ben Joravsky and Michael Miner.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Not much has changed at the Reader, so being owned by a private equity firm doesn&#8217;t appear to be that big of a deal (at least it has money). Speaking purely as a longtime Reader reader: I think the paper&#8217;s troubles started when they stopped publishing interesting stories, say, around a decade ago. I&#8217;m not just talking about the often-long cover stories &#8212; I&#8217;m talking about all the little stories, too, the ones that appeared on the spread with the numbered events and the Our Towns. The editors/owners obviously made a choice to become another arts-and-culture rag, like hundreds of other alternative newsweeklies. Creative Loafing apparently had no idea it had purchased damaged goods and then proceeded to make a bad situation worse. Thankfully, the Reader still has Ben Joravsky and Michael Miner.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: AEM</title>
		<link>http://www.mediageek.net/2009/08/chicago-reader-goes-the-way-of-clear-channel-and-leverage-is-the-culprit/comment-page-1/#comment-215797</link>
		<dc:creator>AEM</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2009 19:13:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mediageek.net/?p=2021#comment-215797</guid>
		<description>How did I miss this? Thanks for keeping up on it Paul.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>How did I miss this? Thanks for keeping up on it Paul.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

