<?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: SERM: Search Engine Reputation Management</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.pr-consultant.co.uk/serm-search-engine-reputation/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.pr-consultant.co.uk/serm-search-engine-reputation/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Mar 2010 20:28:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Public Relations Vs Search Marketing</title>
		<link>http://www.pr-consultant.co.uk/serm-search-engine-reputation/comment-page-1/#comment-5</link>
		<dc:creator>Public Relations Vs Search Marketing</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2007 13:53:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.pr-consultant.co.uk/2005/10/serm-search-engine-reputation.html#comment-5</guid>
		<description>[...] PR 2.0 looks much like old fashioned PR 1.0 done right. To quote forgotten jargon from 2005, Search Engine Reputation Management (SERM) will always be subordinate. The public relations profession will have to learn some new tricks and, [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] PR 2.0 looks much like old fashioned PR 1.0 done right. To quote forgotten jargon from 2005, Search Engine Reputation Management (SERM) will always be subordinate. The public relations profession will have to learn some new tricks and, [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
