<?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: New judging controversy for Cannes Lions after late disqualification of Grand Prix winner</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mumbrella.com.au/new-judging-controvery-for-cannes-lions-after-late-disqualification-of-grand-prix-winner-28948/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mumbrella.com.au/new-judging-controvery-for-cannes-lions-after-late-disqualification-of-grand-prix-winner-28948</link>
	<description>Everything under Australia’s media, marketing &#38; entertainment umbrella</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 May 2012 03:21:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Multiple Cannes Award Winner</title>
		<link>http://mumbrella.com.au/new-judging-controvery-for-cannes-lions-after-late-disqualification-of-grand-prix-winner-28948#comment-45925</link>
		<dc:creator>Multiple Cannes Award Winner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jun 2010 04:10:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mumbrella.com.au/?p=28948#comment-45925</guid>
		<description>All of the above.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>All of the above.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lee Kociski</title>
		<link>http://mumbrella.com.au/new-judging-controvery-for-cannes-lions-after-late-disqualification-of-grand-prix-winner-28948#comment-45796</link>
		<dc:creator>Lee Kociski</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 28 Jun 2010 03:31:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mumbrella.com.au/?p=28948#comment-45796</guid>
		<description>Winner or not, long live the art of long copy!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Winner or not, long live the art of long copy!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://mumbrella.com.au/new-judging-controvery-for-cannes-lions-after-late-disqualification-of-grand-prix-winner-28948#comment-45730</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 27 Jun 2010 00:44:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mumbrella.com.au/?p=28948#comment-45730</guid>
		<description>The Regulars is the best ever example of an ad &#039;punching above its weight&#039;. What are the chances of it being entered in the Effective Awards...not!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Regulars is the best ever example of an ad &#8216;punching above its weight&#8217;. What are the chances of it being entered in the Effective Awards&#8230;not!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Anonymous</title>
		<link>http://mumbrella.com.au/new-judging-controvery-for-cannes-lions-after-late-disqualification-of-grand-prix-winner-28948#comment-45713</link>
		<dc:creator>Anonymous</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Jun 2010 03:41:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mumbrella.com.au/?p=28948#comment-45713</guid>
		<description>So, it didn&#039;t even make the cut in 2008, but was going to take out the Grand Prix this year. Therefore:
A. This year is of a particularly low standard
B. All award shows are just a lucky dip
C. All of the above</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So, it didn&#8217;t even make the cut in 2008, but was going to take out the Grand Prix this year. Therefore:<br />
A. This year is of a particularly low standard<br />
B. All award shows are just a lucky dip<br />
C. All of the above</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

