<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Blending the mix - Latest Comments in Does traditional meda now have a long tail opportunity?</title><link>http://blendingthemix.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="https://blendingthemix.disqus.com/does_traditional_meda_now_have_a_long_tail_opportunity/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 06 Jun 2006 05:45:30 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Does traditional meda now have a long tail opportunity?</title><link>http://blendingthemix.com/2006/06/02/does-traditional-meda-now-have-a-long-tail-opportunity/#comment-6089951</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Ain't that the truth Ann!&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;But, should we, as Web 2.0 aware professionals not take some responsibility for the lack of understanding in the mainstream?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Wiki, blogs and CGC are all phrases which appear very geeky and alienate many. It is almost as if these phrases give many in the industry a feeling of comfort to be using terminology that confuses others - that way it keeps its edge of dependency!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">paulfabretti</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 06 Jun 2006 05:45:30 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Does traditional meda now have a long tail opportunity?</title><link>http://blendingthemix.com/2006/06/02/does-traditional-meda-now-have-a-long-tail-opportunity/#comment-6089950</link><description>&lt;p&gt;True enough, Paul. You might be right in supposing that strategy.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The truth is that in many traditional industries, the idea of a *web* site is about as 2.0 as it gets.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Ann Handley</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 05 Jun 2006 20:44:30 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>