<?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: Social Media Dreamin&#8217;: The 2009 Edition</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mpdailyfix.com/social-media-dreamin-the-2009-edition/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mpdailyfix.com/social-media-dreamin-the-2009-edition/?utm_source=rss&amp;utm_medium=rss&amp;utm_campaign=social-media-dreamin-the-2009-edition</link>
	<description>Opinions. Commentary. News.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 02:23:11 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Matthew T. Grant</title>
		<link>http://www.mpdailyfix.com/social-media-dreamin-the-2009-edition/comment-page-1/#comment-43474</link>
		<dc:creator>Matthew T. Grant</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jan 2010 14:32:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mpdailyfix.com/social-media-dreamin-the-2009-edition/#comment-43474</guid>
		<description>First of all, an encyclopedic look back at the year in social media and no comments? None? Mike, you deserve better.
Second (of all), I fully agree with the arc of your post here, which starts with Twitter (which made the cover of Time, etc.) but ends with Facebook. I think that the continuing rise of Facebook shows the importance of platform.
Twitter, at the end of the day, is an app or, at best, a kind of program (as in &quot;television program&quot;). I might log in to see &quot;what&#039;s on&quot; but will bail if it&#039;s boring.
Facebook, on the other hand, is more like a place that I can explore. I think the explorable on the web will always have longer legs (if that makes sense).
Third of all, I&#039;ma let you finish!
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>First of all, an encyclopedic look back at the year in social media and no comments? None? Mike, you deserve better.<br />
Second (of all), I fully agree with the arc of your post here, which starts with Twitter (which made the cover of Time, etc.) but ends with Facebook. I think that the continuing rise of Facebook shows the importance of platform.<br />
Twitter, at the end of the day, is an app or, at best, a kind of program (as in &#8220;television program&#8221;). I might log in to see &#8220;what&#8217;s on&#8221; but will bail if it&#8217;s boring.<br />
Facebook, on the other hand, is more like a place that I can explore. I think the explorable on the web will always have longer legs (if that makes sense).<br />
Third of all, I&#8217;ma let you finish!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

