<?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: The Disconnected Media</title>
	<atom:link href="http://dissidentvoice.org/2008/01/the-disconnected-media/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://dissidentvoice.org/2008/01/the-disconnected-media/</link>
	<description>a radical newsletter in the struggle for peace and social justice</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 08 Dec 2011 15:07:30 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: walt brasch</title>
		<link>http://dissidentvoice.org/2008/01/the-disconnected-media/#comment-13077</link>
		<dc:creator>walt brasch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Jan 2008 23:26:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/01/the-disconnected-media/#comment-13077</guid>
		<description>Polling is an exact science--as sciences go. However, it is still nearly impossible to quantify people&#039;s values and beliefs. Also, what the polls did not reveal is that many people gave one response but changed closer to entering the polls. There was a LOT of changing opinions in NH. The result of all of this was error by pollsters. BUT, the important issue is that the media did not listen to the people. The key of the article/column is that the reporters talked to pollsters, to candidates, to each other, and did not spend a lot of time in the grassroots part of America listening to the people</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Polling is an exact science&#8211;as sciences go. However, it is still nearly impossible to quantify people&#8217;s values and beliefs. Also, what the polls did not reveal is that many people gave one response but changed closer to entering the polls. There was a LOT of changing opinions in NH. The result of all of this was error by pollsters. BUT, the important issue is that the media did not listen to the people. The key of the article/column is that the reporters talked to pollsters, to candidates, to each other, and did not spend a lot of time in the grassroots part of America listening to the people</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael Donnelly</title>
		<link>http://dissidentvoice.org/2008/01/the-disconnected-media/#comment-12886</link>
		<dc:creator>Michael Donnelly</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Jan 2008 02:03:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/01/the-disconnected-media/#comment-12886</guid>
		<description>Uh. They DID spend listen to NH voters, as that&#039;s who answered their polling questions. The media pollsters used the same methodolgy for every candidate. They were right on (within 1%) 24 hours before the election on ALL candidates but two - HRC and Obama. Why? What changed in less than 24 hours? An 8.3% average swing in 24 hours is indeed &quot;surprising.&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Uh. They DID spend listen to NH voters, as that&#8217;s who answered their polling questions. The media pollsters used the same methodolgy for every candidate. They were right on (within 1%) 24 hours before the election on ALL candidates but two &#8211; HRC and Obama. Why? What changed in less than 24 hours? An 8.3% average swing in 24 hours is indeed &#8220;surprising.&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

