<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?><oembed><version><![CDATA[1.0]]></version><provider_name><![CDATA[The Dish]]></provider_name><provider_url><![CDATA[http://dish.andrewsullivan.com]]></provider_url><author_name><![CDATA[Andrew Sullivan]]></author_name><author_url><![CDATA[https://dish.andrewsullivan.com/author/sullydish/]]></author_url><title><![CDATA[Dissent Of The&nbsp;Day]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[<p>A reader writes:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Re: <a href="http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/03/what-prejudice.html">What Prejudice Is</a>, I appreciate this attitude, but I&#8217;d like to point out that just a few posts down, you celebrate Nikki Finke&#8217;s argument with Peter Bart as some broader attack on the &quot;MSM,&quot; with the implication that Bart&#8217;s position stands in for the whole industry.</p>
</blockquote>
<blockquote>
<p>Furthermore, this minor tempest over whether the publishing industry deserves to die came from a report where one &#8212; one &#8212; panel at one convention showed some ignorance, and not from some broad reporting on publishers as a whole.  </p>
<p>Please, please break the blogospheric mold and try to see outlets as unique entities and reporters as individuals.&nbsp; Lumping us all together as the &quot;MSM&quot; is reductive and simplistic, a tool used by the Glenn Reynolds and Michelle Malkins of the world to discredit all disagreeable reporting.&nbsp; No media operation is like another, and different eyes see different things.</p>
</blockquote>
]]></html></oembed>