<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Smoke Filled Room - Latest Comments</title><link xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="http://api.friendfeed.com/2008/03#sup" href="http://disqus.com/sup/all.sup#forumcomments-844c14b6" type="application/json"/><link>http://smokefilledroom.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://smokefilledroom.disqus.com/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Feb 2012 04:30:54 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Why there isn't a British West Wing</title><link>http://smokefilledroom.co.uk/2011/08/why-there-isnt-a-british-west-wing/#comment-441727075</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Firstly, I think that comparing the House of Lords to Congress is definitely an overstatement. The House of Lords is not the powerful entity that Congress is; the 2005 Constitutional Reform Act essentially made it into a redundant institution. The introduction of the Supreme Court was pointless as the body could never work because the UK does not have a clear separation of powers.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The only real foil for the Prime Minister, as mentioned in this article, is Parliament and the party itself. &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Lucy Atkinson</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 17 Feb 2012 04:30:54 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Why there isn't a British West Wing</title><link>http://smokefilledroom.co.uk/2011/08/why-there-isnt-a-british-west-wing/#comment-439763008</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I'm not denying it can done (see last paragraph) just that there are overlaps between structures of government and structures of story-telling that make telling certain kinds of stories easier when you're talking about certain kinds of governments. &lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;I haven't been keeping up with Borgen but I'd say coalition government would be another good example of the kind of institutionalised conflict that are ready made to build drama around - so possibly that's in favour of my basic argument not against. Not sure, it's on my 'to watch' list. &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Alex Parsons</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 08:27:56 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Why there isn't a British West Wing</title><link>http://smokefilledroom.co.uk/2011/08/why-there-isnt-a-british-west-wing/#comment-439743169</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Um. Borgen has no 'US style monarchy' and has coalition poltiics to contend with. The Lords are also a healthy foil for the government aka congress.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;It could be done.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">liversedge</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 15 Feb 2012 07:48:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Black Mirror: The Media and The Mob</title><link>http://smokefilledroom.co.uk/2011/12/black-mirror-the-media-and-the-mob/#comment-421222422</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Nice back history with the Screen Burn find. That definitely seals the context. I really liked this episode, but to be honest I'm not sure I could watch it again and again and again, which is what bewilders me about the people that will buy the &lt;a href="http://www.tuppencemagazine.co.uk/black-mirror-dvd.html" rel="nofollow"&gt;Black Mirror DVD&lt;/a&gt; that's coming out soon. Although I guess the commentary and cut scenes will be interesting, if slightly off-putting too.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Rio</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 26 Jan 2012 03:36:52 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Doctor Who 6.5: "Overhead, without any fuss, the stars were going out."</title><link>http://smokefilledroom.co.uk/2011/08/overhead-without-any-fuss/#comment-351980193</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Cheers, I can't really remember where I first came across it - I suspect a forum somewhere (where the thread was promptly recategorized and moved). &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Alex Parsons</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 31 Oct 2011 11:16:07 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Doctor Who 6.5: "Overhead, without any fuss, the stars were going out."</title><link>http://smokefilledroom.co.uk/2011/08/overhead-without-any-fuss/#comment-339643114</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Huh, somehow you managed to mention a lot of things I like a lot that I have read/seen/thought about, yet somehow combined them in a wholly unexpected way. How did you first find out about the WikiHistory one, by the by? (I think I found it Googling something completely different)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Arlo Barnes</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 19 Oct 2011 23:33:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Dowler Revelations Show Tabloid Press is Out of Control</title><link>http://smokefilledroom.co.uk/2011/07/dowler-revelations-show-tabloid-press-is-out-of-control/#comment-244916749</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks for your comments John- I agree that Hugh Grant has been superb throughout the whole thing. It's all developed somewhat in the past few days, might blog again today.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Danny CC</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 07 Jul 2011 07:41:57 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Dowler Revelations Show Tabloid Press is Out of Control</title><link>http://smokefilledroom.co.uk/2011/07/dowler-revelations-show-tabloid-press-is-out-of-control/#comment-244285967</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Great read DCC! I'm 99% sure you'll have seen this already, but Hugh Grant's expose piece on Paul McMullan published in the 'New Statesman' is well worth a read - reveals more about the murky depths journos will sink to.  He also throws a bit of humour in there and is in no way precious about the incident when he was exposed as visiting a prostitute.  He actually uses it as a way to encourage McMullan to go into more detail about the lack of ethics in the tabloid press, as well as the supposed "duty" of celebrities to be legitimate targets for hackery and under-handed methods of exposure.  Not bad for someone who agreed to 'Music and Lyrics'... Keep up the good work!&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">John Hall</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 06 Jul 2011 14:38:21 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Test Post</title><link>http://smokefilledroom.co.uk/2011/07/test-post/#comment-241717750</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Test Comment.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Alex Parsons</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 04 Jul 2011 05:15:49 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Hello world!</title><link>http://smokefilledroom.co.uk/2011/06/hello-world/#comment-241716092</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Hi, this is a comment.&lt;br&gt;To delete a comment, just log in and view the post's comments. There you will have the option to edit or delete them.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mr WordPress</dc:creator><pubDate>Fri, 24 Jun 2011 10:03:00 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>
