<?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: International Olympic Committee Allows Beijing Athletes To Blog</title>
	<atom:link href="http://davefleet.com/2008/02/international-olympic-committee-allows-beijing-athletes-to-blog/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://davefleet.com/2008/02/international-olympic-committee-allows-beijing-athletes-to-blog/</link>
	<description>Exploring the intersection of communications, marketing and social media</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 10:50:58 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Gerry A. de la Rosa</title>
		<link>http://davefleet.com/2008/02/international-olympic-committee-allows-beijing-athletes-to-blog/comment-page-1/#comment-6066</link>
		<dc:creator>Gerry A. de la Rosa</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Aug 2008 03:21:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://davefleet.com/2008/02/international-olympic-committee-allows-beijing-athletes-to-blog/#comment-6066</guid>
		<description>If the motto of the Olympiad is "Higher, Stronger, Faster", why would the Shooting and Equestrian be considered in the Olympics?  Shooting definitely does not need strength, swiftness and no altitudes involved.  So is with equestrian.  The rider does not need the 3 but horse does.

Why is the IOC not even considering bowling?  It definitely needs strength and swiftness.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>If the motto of the Olympiad is &#8220;Higher, Stronger, Faster&#8221;, why would the Shooting and Equestrian be considered in the Olympics?  Shooting definitely does not need strength, swiftness and no altitudes involved.  So is with equestrian.  The rider does not need the 3 but horse does.</p>
<p>Why is the IOC not even considering bowling?  It definitely needs strength and swiftness.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ian Ross</title>
		<link>http://davefleet.com/2008/02/international-olympic-committee-allows-beijing-athletes-to-blog/comment-page-1/#comment-230</link>
		<dc:creator>Ian Ross</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 17 Feb 2008 21:09:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://davefleet.com/2008/02/international-olympic-committee-allows-beijing-athletes-to-blog/#comment-230</guid>
		<description>Hey Dave,
Great minds think alike. I blogged on this topic yesterday as well. Yes, it is good news that the IOC is testing the online waters. 
However, the censorship rules are pretty extreme. Athletes can't talk about competitors, post video or audio of competitions, post pictures that show them at recognizable Olympic venues, and a ton of other stuff.
And unless they are going to stop spectators from bringing in cameras, there will be thousands of people posting video, audio and pics on their own blogs. So why can't the athletes.

Seems like a missed PR opportunity to reconnect with fans.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Dave,<br />
Great minds think alike. I blogged on this topic yesterday as well. Yes, it is good news that the IOC is testing the online waters.<br />
However, the censorship rules are pretty extreme. Athletes can&#8217;t talk about competitors, post video or audio of competitions, post pictures that show them at recognizable Olympic venues, and a ton of other stuff.<br />
And unless they are going to stop spectators from bringing in cameras, there will be thousands of people posting video, audio and pics on their own blogs. So why can&#8217;t the athletes.</p>
<p>Seems like a missed PR opportunity to reconnect with fans.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
