<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Blogcritics: Comments on Capitalism and Hollywood</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/</link>
<description>A sinister cabal of superior bloggers on music, books, film, popular culture, politics, and technology - updated continuously.</description>
<language>en</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2005 by the authors</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:41:19 EDT</lastBuildDate>
<docs>http://backend.userland.com/rss</docs>
<generator>Blogcritics.org custom software</generator>

<item>
<title>Comment by Emily</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/09/28/000004.php#comment-88071</link>
<description>I&#039;m not sure I quite agree with your assertion that Hollywood is a meritocracy.  It&#039;s certainly the case in some instances, however plenty of people bribe or buy their way in, use family connections, etc.  Rarely can an artist genuinely stink and still see success (though this is hardly a rule - Pia Zadora, anyone?), but many a &quot;talent&quot; would have been overlooked or never realized were it not for this extra help.</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">88071@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:41:19 EDT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Comment by Eric Olsen</title>
<link>http://blogcritics.org/archives/2004/09/28/000004.php#comment-87639</link>
<description>I agree with your assessment of the two Hollywoods - funny that we don&#039;t hear that much about the irony of the two positions. Clearly the comfort of fortune and fame allows for the limo liberal worldview. Hollywood puts out a lot of crap, but the public has the vote. Thanks Tom!</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">87639@blogcritics.org</guid>
<pubDate>Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:22:16 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>