<?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/"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: BBC, are you listening?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://wellwhatdoyouknow.wordpress.com/2008/04/02/bbc-are-you-listening/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://wellwhatdoyouknow.wordpress.com/2008/04/02/bbc-are-you-listening/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 31 Oct 2008 03:06:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Barry Tork</title>
		<link>http://wellwhatdoyouknow.wordpress.com/2008/04/02/bbc-are-you-listening/#comment-254</link>
		<dc:creator>Barry Tork</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Apr 2008 11:22:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://wellwhatdoyouknow.wordpress.com/?p=81#comment-254</guid>
		<description>I cannot believe the BBC have released this bunch of cack. But I&#039;ve even more disbelief that they&#039;ve not immediately pulled it once it became clear to everyone how appalling it was.

They&#039;ve made it twice as big but with less information presented. The prior ability to capture all the latest news, from a single page, at a glance, has been completely lost. That&#039;s why people go to a news site like the BBC. What part of that don&#039;t they understand?

Their lack of understanding illustrates that the interface designers think they&#039;re producing a glossy mag, not a compact efficient news delivery medium.

I&#039;m just staggered that something so obviously unfit-for-purpose has managed to get through all the various steps of a design, development, test and release process without someone, somewhere in the process, having the guts to say &quot;the Emperor has no clothes&quot;.

And the patronising attitude from the BBC management in their blogs takes the biscuit.

What an absolute shower of wasters they are, with us the sorry saps forced to pick up the bill for the sorry shambles.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I cannot believe the BBC have released this bunch of cack. But I&#8217;ve even more disbelief that they&#8217;ve not immediately pulled it once it became clear to everyone how appalling it was.</p>
<p>They&#8217;ve made it twice as big but with less information presented. The prior ability to capture all the latest news, from a single page, at a glance, has been completely lost. That&#8217;s why people go to a news site like the BBC. What part of that don&#8217;t they understand?</p>
<p>Their lack of understanding illustrates that the interface designers think they&#8217;re producing a glossy mag, not a compact efficient news delivery medium.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m just staggered that something so obviously unfit-for-purpose has managed to get through all the various steps of a design, development, test and release process without someone, somewhere in the process, having the guts to say &#8220;the Emperor has no clothes&#8221;.</p>
<p>And the patronising attitude from the BBC management in their blogs takes the biscuit.</p>
<p>What an absolute shower of wasters they are, with us the sorry saps forced to pick up the bill for the sorry shambles.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
