<?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: Spin Sucks</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.feld.com/wp/archives/2005/07/spin-sucks.html/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.feld.com/wp/archives/2005/07/spin-sucks.html</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Feb 2012 17:03:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ben Casnocha</title>
		<link>http://www.feld.com/wp/archives/2005/07/spin-sucks.html/comment-page-1#comment-1342</link>
		<dc:creator>Ben Casnocha</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Jul 2005 04:59:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.feld.com/wp/?p=500#comment-1342</guid>
		<description>I think what this post is really saying is don&#039;t add an unnecessary layer of complexity (a la Seth Levine&#039;s recent posts) during the decision making process. But &quot;spin,&quot; is, as the first commenter wrote, a reality of life. As I just wrote in my own post, the postmodernists have won and now everything is infused with endless perspectives and deconstructions of reality. Instead of hoping for a spin-less world (or decision making situation) I think it&#039;s better to figure out how to &quot;manage the spin.&quot; And the first step in that direction is for everyone to get their biases on the table, for there is no such thing as an objective opinion.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think what this post is really saying is don&#8217;t add an unnecessary layer of complexity (a la Seth Levine&#8217;s recent posts) during the decision making process. But &#8220;spin,&#8221; is, as the first commenter wrote, a reality of life. As I just wrote in my own post, the postmodernists have won and now everything is infused with endless perspectives and deconstructions of reality. Instead of hoping for a spin-less world (or decision making situation) I think it&#8217;s better to figure out how to &#8220;manage the spin.&#8221; And the first step in that direction is for everyone to get their biases on the table, for there is no such thing as an objective opinion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jack Krupansky</title>
		<link>http://www.feld.com/wp/archives/2005/07/spin-sucks.html/comment-page-1#comment-1341</link>
		<dc:creator>Jack Krupansky</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jul 2005 17:56:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.feld.com/wp/?p=500#comment-1341</guid>
		<description>Unfortunately, we can never completely escape from spin.  Even a simple statement of &quot;raw&quot; facts will inevitably involve some spin.  After all, our perception of even objective facts is driven by the angle at which we observe a problem.

The latest NASA shuttle mission briefings are great lessons on the vast spectrum of spin that is possible.  NASA is of course notorious for its spin.  But the &quot;objective&quot; media are no-less susceptible to a variety of forms of spin.  For example, NASA clearly stated that the latest foam problem meant that the shuttle won&#039;t fly again until the problem is fixed, but the media was insistent that the term &quot;Grounded&quot; needed to be used.

Somehow, the image of an entrepreneur without any spin conjures up the image of the emperor without his clothes.

-- Jack Krupansky
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Unfortunately, we can never completely escape from spin.  Even a simple statement of &#8220;raw&#8221; facts will inevitably involve some spin.  After all, our perception of even objective facts is driven by the angle at which we observe a problem.</p>
<p>The latest NASA shuttle mission briefings are great lessons on the vast spectrum of spin that is possible.  NASA is of course notorious for its spin.  But the &#8220;objective&#8221; media are no-less susceptible to a variety of forms of spin.  For example, NASA clearly stated that the latest foam problem meant that the shuttle won&#8217;t fly again until the problem is fixed, but the media was insistent that the term &#8220;Grounded&#8221; needed to be used.</p>
<p>Somehow, the image of an entrepreneur without any spin conjures up the image of the emperor without his clothes.</p>
<p>&#8211; Jack Krupansky</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
<!-- WP Super Cache 0.8.9.1 -->
