<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">
	<channel>
		<title><![CDATA[Consumerist]]></title>
		
		<link>http://consumerist.com</link>
		<description><![CDATA[Shoppers Bite Back.]]></description>
				    			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Newsweek has some tips for Madoff on hiring ... [Madoff] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p>Newsweek has some tips for Madoff on hiring a prison consultant who can help him get the most out of his 150 year stay in FPMITA prison, or whatever resort he lands in. [<a href="http://www.newsweek.com/id/204491/page/1">Newsweek</a>]</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5303773/]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5303773</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ madoff ]]></category>
			<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 14:52:37 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5303773&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Billy Mays Likely Died Of Heart Disease [Tragic] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-29-2009_1-06-52_PM.jpg" width="126" height="124" />A Florida medical examiner says that beloved pitchman <a class="autolink" title="Click here to read more posts tagged BILLY MAYS" title="Click here to read more posts tagged BILLY MAYS" href="http://consumerist.com/tag/billy-mays/">Billy Mays</a> suffered from hypertensive heart disease and likely died of a heart attack. A day earlier, Mays bumped his head during a rough landing on a US Airways flight &mdash; but the autopsy showed no head trauma. </p> <p>Mays was also taking Tramadol and hydrocodone for hip pain, but the examiner says that there was no evidence that Mays was abusing these drugs, and that pill counts show he had been taking the correct amount.</p> <p><a href="http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/wire/sns-ap-us-billy-mays,1,3937261.story">Medical examiner: TV pitchman Billy Mays likely died of heart attack; no head trauma found</a> [LA Times]</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5303716/billy-mays-likely-died-of-heart-disease]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5303716</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ tragic ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Billy Mays ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ infomercials ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Pitchmen ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Sad ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 13:17:23 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5303716&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Madoff Eligible To Scam Again In Only 150 Years [Madoff] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-29-2009_12-02-35_PM.jpg" width="210" height="256" />A federal judge has sentenced Bernard L. Madoff to 150 years in prison, after which time we assume he'll drink the blood of the living, hang out a shingle, and start soliciting "investments." </p> <p>The <em>New York Times</em> reports that the judge didn't buy Madoff's theory that there was some sort of "mob vengeance" surrounding calls for a long prison term.</p> <p>"Objectively speaking, the fraud here was staggering," the judge said. "It spanned more than 20 years." </p> <p>Of course, this was just a polite, judgy way of saying "LOL, no dude, what you did <strong>really is that bad.</strong>"</p> <p>Speaking for himself, Fraudy McEvil told the court his life really sucks. </p> <p>"I live in a tormented state now, knowing all of the pain and suffering that I've created. I've left a legacy of shame, as some of my victims have pointed out, to my family and my grandchildren."</p> <p>He also apologized to his victims, acknowledging that it didn't really matter if he was sorry.</p> <p>"I will turn and face you. I'm sorry. I know that doesn't help you."</p> <p>The Times also noted that when passing the maximum sentence on Captain Jackass, the judge mentioned that no one &mdash; not "friends, family or other supporters had submitted any letters on Mr. Madoff's behalf, attesting to the strength of his character or good deeds he had done."</p> <p>So, future Madoffs, take note: Be sure to Robin Hood it up whilst stealing people's life savings. It'll look better in court.</p> <p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/business/30madoff.html?hp">Madoff Sentenced to 150 Years in Prison for Ponzi Scheme </a> [NYT]</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5303675/madoff-eligible-to-scam-again-in-only-150-years]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5303675</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ madoff ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Ponzi ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ sentencing ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Top ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 12:19:45 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5303675&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Southwest Apologizes To The Frequent Flyer Who Was Suddenly Too Big To Fly [Happy Endings] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-26-2009_3-16-51_PM.jpg" width="349" height="252" />Southwest Airlines has apologized to Chip, the frequent business traveler who was denied boarding because he was <a class="autolink" title="Click here to read more posts tagged TOO BIG TO FLY" title="Click here to read more posts tagged TOO BIG TO FLY" href="http://consumerist.com/tag/too-big-to-fly/">too big to fly</a>. If you recall, Chip, <a href="http://consumerist.com/5299796/southwest-suddenly-decides-frequent-flyer-is-too-big-to-fly">a self-described "big guy," does not use a seat belt extender and says he has no trouble fitting into a standard airline seat. </a></p> <p>Southwest Airlines says (to Chip):</p> <blockquote><p> Certainly, your history as our Customer would suggest that our Employees haven't identified you as a Customer of size in the past, and we regret the inconsistency you experienced in Las Vegas. As a very frequent Customer who notes he is a "huge fan," you're no doubt aware that the primary key to our success over the past 38 years is our workforce. And, of course, our workforce is made up of humans who are, unfortunately, fallible. As you describe yourself as "barely" fitting into our seats, it isn't unreasonable (as you acknowledge) for our Employee to approach you about your seating needs.</p> <p>However, once your situation escalated to a Supervisor and you explained again that you've traveled many, many times without being approached, our Employees should have reevaluated the situation.</p> <p>I assure you that the appropriate Leaders have been made aware of your concerns. Although we will be unable to share any specifics with you, we are confident our Leaders will address the situation appropriately.</p> <p>Additionally, as a tangible expression of our apologies, I have issued you [redacted] in travel credit, the value of which equals that of your roundtrip fare. The travel credit will arrive via e-mail within a few days.</p> <p>As you're aware, Southwest Airlines is a very good airline with an excellent performance record; friendly, capable Employees; and a strong commitment to Customer Service. We regret making you feel otherwise on June 15, and I hope that your faith in our Company continues and that we can look forward to future opportunities to have you on our flights.</p></blockquote> <p> Chip says:</p> <blockquote><p>Although this wasn't about money, I accept your offer.</p> <p>It is probably worth mentioning that I have already flown on Southwest four(4) times since last Monday. Many many people have suggested that I switch airlines, but that would be foolish. I already fly the best airline in the US, so there's no need to change. I know that the two employees that hampered my travel plans last Monday are the exception to Southwest's fine customer service, not the rule. Hopefully they are being dealt with accordingly.</p></blockquote> <p> We love a happy ending. You can check out Southwest's full letter and more of Chip's thoughts about the incident,<a href="http://blog.paswater.com/?p=17"> here.</a></p> <p><a href="http://blog.paswater.com/?p=17">Thank You Jim Ruppel at Southwest</a> [Chip's Blog]</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5303057/southwest-apologizes-to-the-frequent-flyer-who-was-suddenly-too-big-to-fly]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5303057</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Happy Endings ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Airlines ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Southwest ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Too big to fly ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Travel ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 15:28:17 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5303057&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Walmart Greeter Who Was Attacked During Receipt Check Gets $20,000 Settlement [Lawsuits] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-26-2009_2-48-47_PM.jpg" width="240" height="127" />Remember the Walmart greeter who was <a href="http://consumerist.com/5142513/tennessee-suspends-and-opens-investigation-of-police-officer-who-shoved-walmart-receipt-checker">attacked by a police officer when he tried to check the cop's receipt? </a>His lawsuit has been settled for $20,000.</p> <p>The Chattanoogan is reporting that the city of Chattanooga paid $10,000 and officer paid $10,000 to the greeter, and offers this recap of the incident, which includes shoppers being thrown through glass doors, and pants being defecated in.</p> <blockquote><p> The complaint said the greeter asked the officers for their receipts. It says Lt. McPherson complied, but Det. Freeman walked around the greeter and continued toward the door. It says the greeter asked officer Freeman to produce the receipt and he ignored him.</p> <p>It said when the greeter touched him on the shoulder, he "suddenly and without any warning to plaintiff" turned on him and pushed him to the concrete floor.</p> <p>Mr. Walker "struck the floor with the length of his body about five to six feet from the point of Freeman's push," it was stated.</p> <p>It said officer Freeman stood over the greeter as he struck the floor.</p> <p>The suit said as a result of the "physical assault" that Mr. Walker lost consciousness for a moment and defecated in his pants. It said his supervisor later allowed him to change clothing and get a clean pair of underwear.</p> <p>The complaint said many members of the public came to the greeter's aid, including one "Good Samaritan" who "attempted to come between Freeman and the downed plaintiff, but Freeman pushed this person with such force as to drive him through the glass doors of the store."</p></blockquote> <p> All's well that end's well, we suppose.</p> <p><a href="http://www.nooga.com/062609shover.html">Settlement Reached In Case Involving Shoving Of Wal-Mart Greeter</a> [Chattanoogan] <em>(Thanks, Jeremy!)</em><br /> (Photo:<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/coastercrash/3623958834/">oamg823</a>)</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5303043/walmart-greeter-who-was-attacked-during-receipt-check-gets-20000-settlement]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5303043</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Lawsuits ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Big Box ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Greeter ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Receipt checking controversy ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Receipts ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Retail ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Settlements ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Walmart ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 14:59:47 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5303043&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Wondering about Windows 7? PC World has put ... [Windows 7] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><strong>Wondering about <a class="autolink" title="Click here to read more posts tagged WINDOWS 7" title="Click here to read more posts tagged WINDOWS 7" href="http://consumerist.com/tag/windows-7/">Windows 7</a>?</strong> PC World has put together a FAQ that will bring you up to speed on all the pre-order deals, upgrade policies, and everything else you need to start plotting your escape from Vista. [<a href="http://www.pcworld.com/article/167444/windows_7_upgrade_faq.html">PC World</a>]</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5303023/]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5303023</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ windows 7 ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Microsoft ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Upgrade ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Vista ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 14:41:17 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5303023&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Surprise! Fees And Taxes Are More Than The Cost Of The Hotel Room! [Travel] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p>Over at Elliott.org a reader has sent in a screenshot from a recent attempt to book a discounted hotel room in Venice. The price was supposed to be $375 a night marked down from $537. It seemed like a good deal until he saw the taxes and fees...</p> <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-26-2009_1-47-01_PM.jpg" align="left" hspace="4" vspace="2" width="562" height="308" style="display:block;" /> The reader called the website, <a href="http://www.cheapostay.com/">Cheapostay.com,</a> to ask about the outrageous fees... but was disconnected after 45 minutes on hold.</p> <p>All we can say is thank goodness for that $10 instant promotion they tacked on there at the end. That really made all the difference.</p> <p><a href="http://www.elliott.org/blog/no-cheapo-hotel-fees-double-price-of-discounted-hotel-room/">No cheapo hotel: fees double price of "discounted" hotel room</a> [Elliott]</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5302999/surprise-fees-and-taxes-are-more-than-the-cost-of-the-hotel-room]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5302999</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Travel ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Booking ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Fees ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ hotel fees ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Hotels ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ International ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:58:21 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5302999&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ My In-Laws Won't Stop Using A Converter Box On Their New LCD TV [Dtv] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-26-2009_1-11-52_PM.jpg" width="350" height="260" />Even after the DTV switch, converter-box drama persists. Reader Bob is concerned that his in-laws were oversold on a converter box for their brand new TV. </p> <p>Bob says:</p> <blockquote><p>They were buying a TV for a new RV and bought a DTV converter box. I told them after they got it that they shouldn't need a converter because the TV (an LCD) was new. I unhooked the converter box and the TV found the new digital stations fine. They are in a poor reception area where they only get a couple of channels, but the digital ones were very clear.</p> <p>They still don't quite believe they don't need the converter. I wonder how many people were over-sold the <a class="autolink" title="Click here to read more posts tagged CONVERTER BOXES" title="Click here to read more posts tagged CONVERTER BOXES" href="http://consumerist.com/tag/converter-boxes/">converter boxes</a>. I did a fair amount of searching and couldn't really find much (although there was a glut of general information) about what happens when a converter box is hooked to a new TV. I'm guessing it won't work too great, but I'd like to see a more in depth analysis.</p></blockquote> <p> Is this one of those questions bored physics teachers like to ask? Like, "If you go the speed of light and turn a flashlight on, what happens?" (<a href="http://helios.gsfc.nasa.gov/qa_gp_sl.html">Answer, here.</a>) </p> <p>Well, we're not experts or anything, but our best guess is that the box would do its job and convert the signal into something an analog TV would understand. Since your in-law's TV understands analog signals as well as digital ones &mdash; it probably depends on the quality of the converter box.</p> <p>Consumer Reports tested a bunch of<a href="http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/electronics-computers/tvs-services/digital-tv-converter/ratings/dtv-converter-boxes-ratings.htm"> DTV converter boxes and found that the quality of the image varied. Some produced almost DVD quality images </a> &mdash; others were just about the same as your typical analog broadcast.</p> <p>Anyway, does it really matter? Your in-laws don't need the box &mdash; so tell them to get rid of it.</p> <p>(Photo:<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/vidaarctique/3529898913/">vidaarctique</a>)</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5302969/my-in+laws-wont-stop-using-a-converter-box-on-their-new-lcd-tv]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5302969</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Dtv ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Analog ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Converter boxes ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Digital ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 13:25:47 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5302969&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ A new study says 1 in 25 deaths is somehow ... [Health] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p>A new study says 1 in 25 deaths is somehow tied to alcohol consumption. The impact was compared to that of smoking, the article quotes experts who want to take drastic action such as "increasing the price of alcohol, reducing its availability and banning advertising." That seemed a little draconian to us, until we realized that it would free us from the tyranny of that Bud Lite "drinkability" campaign. [<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8118475.stm">BBC</a>]</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5302944/]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5302944</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Health ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Alcohol ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Fri, 26 Jun 2009 12:36:06 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5302944&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ FAFSA To Get Dramatically Shorter, Less Painful [FAFSA] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-24-2009_2-26-57_PM.jpg" width="168" height="241" />The Department of Education has announced that the FAFSA, considered (by me) to suck worse than any form ever, is getting shorter and less painful. Most importantly for those of you who have procrastination-prone parents that just don't enjoy filling out forms (me, again), the FAFSA will allow students applying for financial aid in the spring semester of 2010 to "seamlessly retrieve their relevant tax information from the IRS for easy completion." </p> <p>In addition to shrinking from 30 screens to 10, CNN says that the new FAFSA will replace soul-destroying bureaucrat speech with simple, easy to understand questions.</p> <blockquote><p> For example, the question, "At any time... did your high school or school district homeless liaison determine that you were an unaccompanied youth who was homeless?" will instead be, "Are you homeless?"</p></blockquote> <p> Well, yay.</p> <p><a href="http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/06/24/student.loans.shorter.forms/">Form for student loans will become shorter</a> [CNN]<br /> <a href="http://www.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2009/06/06242009.html">Obama Administration Announces Streamlined College Aid Application</a> [Department of Education]<br /> (Photo:<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/this-is-my-life/3540878202/">the idealist</a>)</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5302155/fafsa-to-get-dramatically-shorter-less-painful]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5302155</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ FAFSA ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ College ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Education ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ forms ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Government ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Grants ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Pain ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Student aid ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2009 14:37:43 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5302155&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Citibank To Raise Salaries By 50% In Reaction To Bonus Limits [Executive Compensation] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-24-2009_11-12-21_AM.jpg" width="241" height="160" />The <em>AP</em> is reporting that Citibank will be raising salaries for certain employees by as much as 50% in order to offset the new bonus restrictions. The company faces the restrictions because it took bailout money.</p> <p>Citi is changing its compensation in order to continue to pay its workers the same amount without breaking any rules:</p> <blockquote><p> "Citi continues to examine ways to ensure its employee compensation practices are competitive in this very challenging market environment," Citi said in a statement Wednesday. "Any salary adjustments are not intended to increase total annual compensation, rather to adjust the balance between fixed and variable compensation."</p></blockquote> <p><a href="http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5i0mSrJ5eVrjjhveohd2v8sIH8c6AD9913IIO0">Citi boosting salaries to offset lower bonuses</a> [AP]<br /> (Photo:<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/chrismorran/393672593/">cmorran123</a>)</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5302049/citibank-to-raise-salaries-by-50-in-reaction-to-bonus-limits]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5302049</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Executive Compensation ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ bailout ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Citibank ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Citigroup ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Government ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Salaries ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2009 11:53:38 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5302049&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Should GM Cut Back On Advertising During Bankruptcy? They Don't Think So [Poll] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-23-2009_1-16-16_PM.jpg" width="366" height="150" style="display:block;" />Up until its recent plunge into bankruptcy, GM had been our nation's second-largest advertiser &mdash; behind only Procter & Gamble. The company spent $2 billion dollars annually for the past few years &mdash; and though they've recently cut back and fallen into third place behind Verizon, the company apparently plans to continue to spend their pre-bankruptcy budget of $40-50 million a month on ads.</p> <p>The news, of course, has ad agencies breathing a little easier. GM already owes several agencies and media buyers millions of dollars &mdash; and the industry overall is hurting. As for the content of the ads, GM has been taking its cues from the airline industry &mdash; particularly Northwest Airlines (now Delta).</p> <p>From the WSJ:</p> <blockquote> <p>Leading up to its Chapter 11 filing, GM studied how other industries handled communicating with the public while in financial hardship, zeroing in on airlines and particularly Northwest Airlines, which filed for bankruptcy protection in 2005.</p> <p>GM found that by using its frequent-flier database and sending email and letters to customers, Northwest, which has since left bankruptcy court and was acquired last year by Delta Air Lines, was able to reassure many customers very quickly that it would continue to fly.</p> <p>In a campaign that began airing shortly after its Chapter 11 filing, GM went beyond reassurance. In a TV spot dubbed "Reinvention," created by Interpublic's Deutsch, it acknowledged its problems but painted a more positive picture of the future.</p> <p>"This is not about going out of business, this is about getting down to business, because the only chapter we are focused on is chapter one," intones the narrator of the ad, which is scheduled to end later this month.</p> </blockquote> <p>What do you think? Should GM be cutting back on advertising until it emerges from bankruptcy? Or is it important to reassure the public?</p> <p><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" charset="utf-8" src="http://static.polldaddy.com/p/1730154.js"> </script><noscript><br> <a href="http://answers.polldaddy.com/poll/1730154/">Should GM keep spending on ads?</a><span style="font-size:9px;">(<a href="http://www.polldaddy.com">poll</a>)</span><br></noscript></p> <p><a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124562414399735483.html">GM Will Hold Ad Budget Steady</a> [WSJ]<br> (Photo:<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/armydre2008/3572064140/">frankieleon</a>)</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5301275/should-gm-cut-back-on-advertising-during-bankruptcy-they-dont-think-so]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5301275</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Poll ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Bankruptcy ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Carpocalypse ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Gm ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ gm bankruptcy ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Top ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 13:27:43 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5301275&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Company Offering Paid Security Lines For Special People Fails [Failure] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-23-2009_12-41-17_PM.jpg" width="168" height="130">A company offering special, more efficient security lines for frequent travelers has failed and ceased operation on Monday, according to the <em>Atlanta Journal-Constitution.<br></em><br> Members of the service, called "Clear", paid as much as $199 a year and underwent background checks in order to access awesome security lines at participating airports. These security lines apparently led to the same checkpoints as everyone else uses. The company claims to have signed up 260,000 travelers.</p> <p>Apparently, the new streamlined "black diamond" security line for business travelers may have put Clear out of business.</p> <blockquote> <p>[An Atlanta airport spokesperson] said the shutdown of Clear "will not impact our customers" because although Clear members had their own lines leading up to security screening, they used the same checkpoint lanes as other passengers to proceed through metal detectors and have luggage screened.</p> <p>The airport also expanded its security checkpoints and launched streamlined, free security lanes for non-Clear members with designations such as black diamond for expert travelers. That, along with other factors, lessened the advantage Clear had to attract members.</p> <p>"Since our security expansion last fall, security lines at Hartsfield have rarely exceeded 10 minutes," Kennedy said.</p> </blockquote> <p>The company's website says that <a href="http://flyclear.com/">no refunds are to be issued "at the present time."</a> Despite that unfortunate reality, when the <a href="http://consumerist.com/370003/what-does-a-clear-membership-actually-get-you-at-airport-security">potential for shenanigans</a> is taken into account, the closing of this service seems like no great loss to planet Earth. <img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-23-2009_12-39-11_PM.jpg" align="left" hspace="4" vspace="2" width="534" height="147" style="display:block;" /></p> <p><a href="http://www.ajc.com/business/content/business/stories/2009/06/22/Clear_shuts_down.html?cxntlid=homepage_tab_newstab">Clear shuts down paid airport security lines business</a> [AJC] <em>(Thanks, j!)</em></p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5301234/company-offering-paid-security-lines-for-special-people-fails]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5301234</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Failure ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ clear ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Security ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Travel ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Tsa ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:54:11 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5301234&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Farmers Slaughtering Dairy Cows Rather Than Lose Money Producing Milk [Recession Watch] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-22-2009_1-46-33_PM.jpg" width="350" height="262" />It's so expensive to produce milk right now &mdash; due to low demand and high feed costs &mdash; that farmers are being paid to slaughter dairy cows in order to "shift the pain to consumers," says Bloomberg.</p> <p>The National Milk Producers Federation in Arlington, Virginia, will pay dairies to slaughter 103,000 U.S. cows in coming months, says the article, causing milk futures to skyrocket. The U.S. Department of Agriculture is forecasting butter, cheese, and <a class="autolink" title="Click here to read more posts tagged MILK PRICES" title="Click here to read more posts tagged MILK PRICES" href="http://consumerist.com/tag/milk-prices/">milk prices</a> will be painful in 2010. Consumers can expect milk prices to double.</p> <blockquote><p>Retail butter prices may rise above the record of $3.937 a pound and cheddar cheese may top $5.097 a pound, according to Jerry Dryer, 65, the editor of the industry newsletter Dairy & Food Market Analyst in Delray Beach, Florida. </p></blockquote> <p> Experts say that farmers are culling the cows because exports have dropped 26% in the first quarter of 2009, while feed remained expensive.</p> <blockquote><p> "No one is making money producing milk," Wells Fargo's Swanson said by telephone from Minneapolis. "The milk price remains well below the total cost of production." </p></blockquote> <p> Bloomberg says it can cost as much as $17 to produce $10 worth of milk.</p> <p><a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=a9WBQ0UBiWCY">Dairy-Cow Kill to Double Milk Price on Biggest Slump Since 1980 </a> [Bloomberg]<br /> (Photo:<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/nailmaker/554412493/">nailmaker</a>)</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5299920/farmers-slaughtering-dairy-cows-rather-than-lose-money-producing-milk]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5299920</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ recession watch ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ commodities ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Cows ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ dairy ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Economy ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Food ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Milk ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Milk prices ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Recession ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:58:18 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5299920&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Asking Comcast To Lower Your Bill Results In Comcast Lowering Your Bill [Success] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-22-2009_12-53-06_PM.jpg" width="235" height="239" />If you're paying too much for cable these days, it really doesn't hurt to call and ask for a discount. You never know, your cable company might surprise you. That's what happened to reader Nitin.</p> <p>Nitin says:</p> <blockquote><p>i'm a Comcast customer, i currently have the digital cable package with high-speed internet, DVR, Hi-Def TV, and HBO/Cinemax. my monthly bill has been about $160/month. i'm going back to school full-time in the fall, and can't really afford to keep paying that much. so i called Comcast to see what they could do. After being on hold for a couple minutes, I was connected to a very pleasant and friendly customer service representative who listened to my "tale of woe", and very quickly offered me a discounted rate, keeping all the services i have now, of $100/month. it was a surprisingly pleasant and pain-free interaction with a company that hasn't always provided me with such great service in the past. in hindsight, i guess i should have gotten the CSR's name so i could offer a commendation to her superiors, but i guess the submission of this story to Consumerist will have to do instead. Thanks!</p></blockquote> <p> You don't have to be a Comcast subscriber to take advantage of your cable company's generosity. Here's a post <a href="http://consumerist.com/5085784/consumer-101-3-ways-to-lower-your-out-of-control-cable-internet-and-phone-bills">that will help you negotiate your way to a cheaper bill. </a></p> <p>(Photo:<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/groovnick/2349400980/">Groovnick</a>)</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5299839/asking-comcast-to-lower-your-bill-results-in-comcast-lowering-your-bill]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5299839</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Success ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Billing ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Cable ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Comcast ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Negotiation ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2009 12:59:12 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5299839&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Southwest Suddenly Decides Frequent Flyer Is Too Big To Fly [Southwest Airlines] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-22-2009_12-01-40_PM.jpg" width="350" height="253" /><iframe src="http://digg.com/api/diggthis.php?u=http://digg.com/travel_places/Consumerist_Southwest_Decides_Frequent_Flyer_Is_Too_Big " align="right" frameborder="0" height="82" scrolling="no" width="55"></iframe><br /> This is reader Chip. He's 6'1" and says he flies twice a week for business, without incident, on <a class="autolink" title="Click here to read more posts tagged SOUTHWEST AIRLINES" title="Click here to read more posts tagged SOUTHWEST AIRLINES" href="http://consumerist.com/tag/southwest-airlines/">Southwest Airlines</a>. He is a self-described "big guy" but says he doesn't have any problem sitting in an airplane seat &mdash; and doesn't need a seat belt extender to do so. So, why did he suddenly get stopped at the gate and told he needed to buy a second ticket?</p> <p>Chip writes:</p> <blockquote><p>I fly twice a week for business exclusively on Southwest Airlines. In the last year I have probably flown 50-60 times on Southwest. I am about as loyal a Southwest customer as could be expected.</p> <p>So imagine my surprise last Monday when I went to board my 12:40pm flight from Las Vegas (where I live) to Omaha and was prevented from doing so an unruly the gate agent who thought just by looking at me, she could determine whether I was too big to fit in one seat and informed me that I needed to buy a 2nd ticket.</p> <p>Now I am a big guy (6'1, a few extra pounds) but I've never been stopped, asked, suggested, or otherwise looked-at-funny that I should buy 2 seats, by Southwest or any other airline... so I initially shrugged it off as an honest mistake. But she wouldn't budge! Nor would two of the supervisors who were called. They dug their heels in and I stood there arguing with them as my flight boarded and left without me. This was a business trip, so I ended up losing a day of work.</p> <p>The worst part of the whole experience, when I told them I fly twice a week they didn't believe me! I tried to get no less than four(4) Southwest staff to pull up my travel history, both to show them that I was a frequent traveler and my weight wasn't an issue, and to show them I'm a LOYAL customer, but they wouldn't do it. I was stunned at the lack of customer service.</p> <p>The proverbial cherry on top of the whole ordeal was a backhanded apology by the final supervisor who said "he was sorry that I was never stopped before." Now I was irate.</p> <p>Defeated, I went home to reschedule my flight for the next day. I looked up their rules for ejecting "persons of size" and it turns out the true test for determining if someone is too big for one seat is the put them in the seat and see if the armrests go all the way down. These people didn't even do that. They are clearly not allowed to just visually determine if someone is too big or not, that's discrimination! Mind you, I didn't get anywhere near the plane, this all happened at the top of the jetway where the tickets are collected.</p> <p>It's been one week and although I've sent this to Southwest executives, Southwest customer service, and Southwest's twitter account, I have yet to receive any official response or apology from them other than the appalled customer service rep who's job it is to constantly apologize to people like me. Would this be a good time to mention that their customer service line is constantly busy and the only time to get through to them is 7am in the morning? </p> <p>I'm not looking for any free stuff, all I want are the two Southwest employees who denied me my flight (one gate agent, one supervisor) to be educated on what their policies actually are so this won't happen again. As I said, I fly twice a week and I don't want to be ejected again.</p> <p>Thanks Consumerist. Keep fighting the good fight!</p></blockquote> <p> Chip also provided <a href="http://blog.paswater.com/">a blog entry where he details</a> his communication with Southwest. A customer service rep has indeed apologized over the phone, but could not guarantee that Chip wouldn't be randomly yanked from a flight in the future. </p> <p>Here's what he would like from the airline:</p> <blockquote><p>1. An official written apology/letter from Southwest management that I can carry with me so as to prevent this from happening again.<br /> 2. An acknowledgment that the gate agent and supervisor acted in the wrong.<br /> 3. That gate agent and supervisor are reprimanded or otherwise informed that they acted in the wrong, directed to the actual guidelines for "customers of size" so they will not arbitrarily yank someone off a flight again.</p> <p>That's all, no money, no free stuff, no lawsuit, no 6 o'clock news. Just an apology and some effort put into making sure this is not a repeat occurrence.</p></blockquote> <p> The <a href="http://www.southwest.com/travel_center/cos_qa.html">policy as written </a>is pretty clear, and Chip just wants it to be followed. That doesn't sound like too much to ask from a guy who flies twice a week. What do you think?</p> <p>Chip says his rebooked (single ticket) flight to Omaha progressed without incident. </p> <p><a href="http://blog.paswater.com/">Frequent Traveler is Too Fat to Fly on Southwest Airlines</a> [Chip's Blog]</p> <p><strong>UPDATE:</strong> This complaint has been <a href="http://consumerist.com/5303057/southwest-apologizes-to-the-frequent-flyer-who-was-suddenly-too-big-to-fly">resolved.</a></p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5299796/southwest-suddenly-decides-frequent-flyer-is-too-big-to-fly]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5299796</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Southwest Airlines ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Airlines ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Southwest ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Too fat to fly ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Travel ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2009 12:44:11 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5299796&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Walgreens says declining home values and ... [Recession Watch] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-22-2009_11-52-15_AM.jpg" width="168" height="50" />Walgreens says declining home values and rising unemployment are causing consumers to cut back on everything but essentials like soap and milk. Consequently, the drugstore chain is having to spend money revamping its merchandise selection to match the trend. It's back to basics if you want to make money. [<a href="http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=aOLctk.LQULA">Bloomberg</a>]</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5299757/]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5299757</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ recession watch ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Consumer Behavior ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Trends ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Walgreens ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2009 11:58:34 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5299757&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Gross: Your Pet Could Give You A MRSA Infection [Your Health] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-22-2009_11-01-22_AM.jpg" width="168" height="247" />We know you love little Fluffy, but according to an article from ABCNews &mdash; he could give you methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. In case you are not aware &mdash;<a href="http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/mrsa/DS00735"> that's bad news.</a></p> <p>ABC says:</p> <blockquote><p>Particularly worrisome is a growing body of evidence that cats and dogs can be colonized by MRSA &mdash; germs that are probably acquired from their owners, since cats and dogs usually carry a different strain of Staphylococcus bacteria.</p> <p>But the cats and dogs can give the bug back. As long ago as 1988, researchers reported that a cat living in a United Kingdom geriatric unit had passed MRSA back to people. Screening of patients and staff showed that 38 percent of the nursing staff there had colonies of the bacteria living somewhere on them.</p> <p>And that's not uncommon, according to Lawrence McGill, a veterinarian at the ARUP Animal Reference Pathology Laboratory in Salt Lake City, Utah.</p> <p>"There is more and more data pointing to the [fact that the] most common source for animal infections with MRSA is from humans, including contact with medical facilities where humans are treated," McGill said. </p></blockquote> <p> And as if that isn't gross enough there are apparently 30 more pathogens that your pet can transfer to you, and 30-40% of bites on the hand become infected.</p> <p>Of course, after all that, ABC says you shouldn't freak out because infections from pets are rare. Just keep Spike and Muffin clean and maintain their immunizations.</p> <p><a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Health/Germs/Story?id=7884755&page=1">Family Pets May Harbor MRSA, Other Nasties</a> [ABCNews]<br /> (Photo:<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/7681834@N07/3323439924/">Mrs. Drosen</a>)</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5299676/gross-your-pet-could-give-you-a-mrsa-infection]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5299676</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ your health ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Cats ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Dogs ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Gross ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ infections ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ mrsa ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Pets ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2009 11:13:07 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5299676&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Thomas Kinkade, Painter Of Crap, Must Pay $2.1 Million To Former Gallery Owners [Art] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-19-2009_3-01-48_PM.jpg" width="253" height="79" /><a class="autolink" title="Click here to read more posts tagged THOMAS KINKADE" title="Click here to read more posts tagged THOMAS KINKADE" href="http://consumerist.com/tag/thomas-kinkade/">Thomas Kinkade</a> calls himself the "Painter of Light," and allegedly uses his "faith" to lure in investors to his gallery business. Now two former gallery owners have won a judgment from Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that forces Kinkade to abide by a 2007 arbitration decision that awarded the former owners $860,000 in damages and more than $1.2 million in attorneys' fees and arbitration expenses. Ouchy.</p> <p>From the San Francisco Chronicle:</p> <blockquote><p>In its February 2006 decision, the arbitration panel said Kinkade and other company officials used terms like "partner," "trust," "Christian" and "God" to create "a certain religious environment designed to instill a special relationship of trust" with the couple.</p> <p>What the company didn't tell them, said their attorney, was that they would have to sell Kinkade's works at minimum retail prices while the artist undercut them with discount sales, some of which he made himself on cable television.</p> <p>It was part of a plan, they claimed, to lower the value of the publicly traded company before Kinkade bought it in 2004, at steep losses to many investors. Hazlewood and Spinello put their $122,000 savings into galleries in Charlottesville and Fredericksburg, Va., that opened in 1999 and 2000 and closed in 2003.</p></blockquote> <p> Kinkade's company denies everything. "We are confident that before this is over, we'll be vindicated," said a lawyer for the firm.</p> <p><a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/06/17/MNJ11893SP.DTL&tsp=1">Artist's firm on hook for $2.1 million</a> [<a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/06/17/MNJ11893SP.DTL&tsp=1">SFGate</a>]</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5297132/thomas-kinkade-painter-of-crap-must-pay-21-million-to-former-gallery-owners]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5297132</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Art ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Arbitration ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Awards ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ damages ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Galleries ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Lawsuits ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Thomas Kinkade ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2009 15:13:08 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5297132&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Applying For A Job? Great, Give Us Your Google And Facebook Passwords [Privacy] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-19-2009_12-50-17_PM.jpg" width="804" height="204" style="display:block;float:none;" />ReadWriteWeb has a scary article about the city of Bozeman, Montana. It doesn't sound like a scary place, but if you want to say, work for the City, you'll need to give them all your social networking usernames <strong>and passwords.</strong></p> <p>ReadWriteWeb says:</p> <blockquote> <p>The form <a href="http://www.bozeman.net/bozeman/humanResource/forms/Background_Check_Form_Interview_MASTER.pdf">(PDF</a>) is a standard waiver that allows the city to perform a background check, which is obviously a routine procedure, but in addition, the city asks prospective employees to "please list any and all, current personal or business websites, web pages or memberships on any Internet-based chat rooms, social clubs or forums, to include, but not limited to: Facebook, Google, Yahoo, YouTube.com, MySpace, etc." The form provides three lines for entering this information.</p> </blockquote> <p>Handing over your password, of course, allows the City to poke around in all of your business &mdash; including search history and email archive.</p> <p>The local TV station picked up the story and, according to city attorney Greg Sullivan they don't look at, "the things that the federal constitution lists as protected things," and maintains that no one has removed their name from consideration because of the requirement.</p> <p>So why do they even need your passwords? Mr. Sullivan says the City has "positions ranging from fire and police, which require people of high integrity for those positions, all the way down to the lifeguards and the folks that work in city hall here. So we do those types of investigations to make sure the people that we hire have the highest moral character and are a good fit for the City."</p> <p>My moral character says it's wrong to poke around in an applicant's personal life, but what do I know.</p> <p><a href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/want_to_work_for_the_city_of_bozeman_mt_hand_over_passwords_login_info.php"><br> Want to Work for the City of Bozeman, MT? Hand Over Your Social Network Logins and Passwords</a> [ReadWriteWeb] <em>(Thanks, David!)</em></p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5296940/applying-for-a-job-great-give-us-your-google-and-facebook-passwords]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5296940</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Privacy ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Bozeman Montana ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Employment ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Facebook ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Google ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Myspace ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Top ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2009 12:59:55 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5296940&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Saturn Reassures You That Your Warranty Is Still Good [Warranties] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-19-2009_12-21-02_PM.jpg" width="168" height="164">As you probably already know, the <a href="http://consumerist.com/5280174/saturn-to-be-saved-by-detroit-businessman">Penske Automotive Group</a> is buying Saturn from GM, but what will happen to your warranty? Apparently, nothing. It'll stay exactly the same. Saturn recently sent out a letter of reassurance to its customers and reader Jimi was kind enough to scan it for us.</p> <p>Saturn says:<br> <img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-19-2009_12-17-41_PM.jpg" align="left" hspace="4" vspace="2" width="804" height="918" style="display:block;float:none;" /></p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5296892/saturn-reassures-you-that-your-warranty-is-still-good]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5296892</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Warranties ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Carpocalypse ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ penske automotive group ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Saturn ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2009 12:32:53 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5296892&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Man Dies Trying To Stop Verizon Van [Tragic] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-19-2009_12-06-14_PM.jpg" width="229" height="150" />The <em>Washington Post</em> says that a 79-year-old widower died after trying to stop a Verizon technician from pulling out of his drive way. The man was apparently extremely frustrated with his service, in addition to being quite lonely since his wife passed away from a stroke.</p> <p>Police say that after the Verizon tech was finished working on the man's service, he got into his van and began to leave. The homeowner was upset and followed the tech to his vehicle.</p> <p>The homeowner "continued to express his dissatisfaction and tried to block the technician's van from leaving his driveway," a police spokesperson told the Post.</p> <blockquote><p> The technician got inside his van. [The homeowner] Cornelius moved out of the way, and the technician began to drive away, according to police.</p> <p>That was when Cornelius "reached in through the van window and grabbed the steering wheel," [the police spokesperson] said. Cornelius fell to the ground. He was taken to a hospital, where he died. </p></blockquote> <p> Police are still investigating whether the man's death was caused by the fall or something else. </p> <p>Verizon called the incident a "tragic accident," and are cooperating with police.</p> <p><a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/06/18/AR2009061802995.html">Vienna Man Dies After Bid to Stop Verizon Van</a> [Washington Post] <em>(Thanks, Shera!)</em><br /> (Photo:<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/dooleymtv/3147336456/">dooleymtv</a>)</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5296885/man-dies-trying-to-stop-verizon-van]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5296885</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ tragic ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Accidents ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Sad ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Verizon ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2009 12:17:40 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5296885&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Zicam Didn't Share 800 Reports Of Smell Loss With The FDA [Recalls] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-16-2009_2-43-47_PM_01.jpg" width="168" height="174" />The <em>Wall Street Journal</em> says that Matrixx, the manufacturer of the allegedly smell-destroying cold remedy Zicam, is defending their product, but also admits that they didn't share 800 reports of smell loss with the FDA. Despite this, they described the FDA's warning about Zicam as a "complete surprise." </p> <p>From the WSJ:</p> <blockquote><p>"We are hopeful that if we can tell our story to the FDA, that maybe we can get them to change their mind," Matrixx Acting President and Chief Operating Officer William Hemelt said. He claimed that the safety concerns are "erroneous" and said that the agency made no effort to communicate its concerns with the company prior to this week.</p></blockquote> <p> The product has apparently been the target of many consumer lawsuits.</p> <p>"Plaintiffs will still have to prove that Zicam cold remedy caused their loss of smell," Hemelt told the WSJ. The company settled 300 smell-related lawsuits in 2006, but the company president maintained that studies show that Zicam doesn't reach the area of the nose responsible for smell. He then admitted that the company didn't share 800 reports of smell loss with the FDA.</p> <blockquote><p>Hemelt said the company didn't believe it was required to share the information and acted on the advice of company lawyers. </p></blockquote> <p><a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/BT-CO-20090618-711273.html">UPDATE: Matrixx Defends Zicam Pdts Included In FDA Warning </a> [WSJ]</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5295778/zicam-didnt-share-800-reports-of-smell-loss-with-the-fda]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5295778</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Recalls ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Fda ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Lawsuits ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Smell ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Top ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Zicam ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ zinc ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2009 15:55:22 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5295778&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Apple has announced that they have stopped ... [Hype] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p>Apple has announced that they have stopped pre-orders for the iPhone 3G S, which comes out tomorrow "to make sure we have the new iPhone in stock at every Apple retail store,'' according to the Boston Globe. [<a href="http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2009/06/18/apple_stops_us_preorders_for_iphone/">Boston Globe</a>]</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5295751/]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5295751</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Hype ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Apple ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ iPhone ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2009 15:46:08 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5295751&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Sorry, You Are Too Tall For Weight Watchers! [You Must Not Be This Tall] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-18-2009_1-24-18_PM.jpg" width="194" height="47">This is kinda sad. JJ is 6'10" and wants to lose a little weight. Trouble is, 6'10" is too tall for <a class="autolink" title="Click here to read more posts tagged WEIGHT WATCHERS" href="http://consumerist.com/tag/weight-watchers/">Weight Watchers</a> Online.</p> <p>JJ says:</p> <blockquote> <p>In the past I've signed up for weight watchers, and I typically go into a "maintenance" program to help remind me how to eat properly. I tried to sign up today on the 18th of June and was informed that I'm now too tall for them to help me. Funny, I wasn't too tall to give them money this time last year. Essentially, I think it is sad that they are discriminating on height. I could see if they said that I had a real weight problem and needed a hardcore <a class="autolink" title="Click here to read more posts tagged WEIGHT LOSS" href="http://consumerist.com/tag/weight-loss/">weight loss</a> plan, but I'm about 280 lbs. and 6'10". I have a small gut. Ridiculous. Thanks for letting me rant!</p> </blockquote> <p>Any tall people out there with some Weight Watchers alternatives for JJ?</p> <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/wwbig.jpg" align="left" hspace="4" vspace="2" width="722" height="379" style="display:block;float:none;" /></p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5295586/sorry-you-are-too-tall-for-weight-watchers]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5295586</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ You must not be this tall ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Diets ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ tall ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Weight loss ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ weight watchers ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2009 13:48:14 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5295586&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Sausage Package Illustrates What Happens When You're A Jerk To The Copywriter [Funny] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-18-2009_12-55-35_PM.jpg" width="300" height="264" />We did try to investigate the truthfulness of the statement on the package, but<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ainsley_Harriott"> Wikipedia offered no evidence</a> that Mr. Harriott was at all unpleasant. </p> <p><a href="http://blogs.news.com.au/couriermail/andrewbolt/index.php/couriermail/comments/memo_to_advertising_department_rewrite_needed/">Memo to advertising department: Please rewrite</a> [Courier Mail via <a href="http://www.buzzfeed.com/slobizman/this-is-how-advertising-copywriters-get-fired-6g1/">BuzzFeed</a>]</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5295538/sausage-package-illustrates-what-happens-when-youre-a-jerk-to-the-copywriter]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5295538</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Funny ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Ainsley harriott ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ copywriting ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2009 13:09:47 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5295538&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Man Leaves Camera In Airport, Then Actually Gets It Back [Lucky] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-18-2009_12-49-13_PM.jpg" width="240" height="155" />Reader Mike cc'd us on a complimentary email to Southwest Airlines, which is something that usually doesn't happen when the words "<a class="autolink" title="Click here to read more posts tagged LOST AND FOUND" title="Click here to read more posts tagged LOST AND FOUND" href="http://consumerist.com/tag/lost-and-found/">lost and found</a>" are involved. Long story short&mdash; he lost his camera and the airline lost his bags &mdash; but he managed to get everything back with a minimum of effort. Lucky guy!</p> <p>Mike writes (to Southwest Airlines):</p> <blockquote><p>I recently flew via Southwest for the first time. The Trip from Chicago, IL to Amarillo, TX went quite well, although I had a few problems that were quickly remedied by Southwest, and as such, I feel that you should know this. My first problem was caused by me, and was in no way your fault; I left my camera sitting at the gate in Amarillo, TX. I only realized this 30,000 feet above Texas, when it was far too late to go back and get my camera. </p> <p>Since I had a connecting flight in Denver, the first thing I did when I arrived was to go to the ticketing agent at my gate in Denver, to see if she could help me at least determine if my bag had been found (which I suspected it had, as the TSA seems to dislike unattended bags). She tried calling Baggage Services at Amarillo, which surprised me, as I expected her to just give me the phone number there, and send me on my way. She was unable to contact them, but was able to give me 2 phone numbers, one for Baggage Services in Amarillo, and another that was Southwest's 800 number. First, I tried calling Baggage Services, and received no response, so I left a voice mail message with my name, phone number, and a description of the problem I had. I then called the 800 number she gave me which was Southwest's main line. There I was directed to another representative that also tried, unsuccessfully, to reach Amarillo, to inform them of the lost bag. In the end, she was only able to take my information, and file a lost and found report, as well as post a message about the missing bag. All told, this only took me about a half an hour of my time; although at this point, I fully expected to not get my camera back, but that was my own fault, and not the airline's.</p> <p>This is where my second problem occurred, after getting into Chicago (Midway), I waited at the baggage carousel for about 15 minutes (after waiting 20 minutes for one to be assigned to my flight), and after seeing all of the baggage come out, I went to the Midway Southwest baggage services, and filed a claim, which took about 5 minutes.</p> <p>After all this, I call my dad, to tell him to come pick me up (he was waiting in one of the parking lots at Midway), and while I was waiting, I got a call from Baggage Services in Amarillo stating that they had found my camera, and they could ship it to me, although they needed a FedEx account number, because they needed to ship the camera, they couldn't fly it. Hearing this, I was quite happy, and told them I would call back on Monday with a FedEx account number.</p> <p>I make it home, and around 8PM that night, I receive another call from Southwest, this time from Midway baggage services, stating that they had found my checked baggage, and they could put it on a van for delivery that would be leaving Midway at 9PM that night, and the delivery window would be 2-4 hours. I told them that I wouldn't be awake, and they said it would be fine to leave the signed baggage claim form on my porch, and they would just leave the bag there. Well, I ended up getting sidetracked while digging through my backpack for the claim form, and forgot to sign it and leave it on the porch. I realized this the next morning when I woke up; I was worried that I wouldn't be able to get my bag back, as I didn't know whom to contact at Southwest about the bag. When I looked on my porch, my bag was there, they had left it, even in spite of my mistake, I had my luggage back, another pleasant surprise.</p> <p>On Monday, I called back to the baggage services office in Amarillo, and gave them a FedEx account number, and the address they could ship the camera to. Although I asked for, and never received the tracking number, I did receive my camera from FedEx yesterday, and everything is still there in the bag, intact.</p></blockquote> <p>(Photo:<a href="http://www.zonaphoto.com/">Zonaphoto</a>)</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5295531/man-leaves-camera-in-airport-then-actually-gets-it-back]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5295531</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Lucky ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Airlines ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ good ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Lost and Found ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Southwest ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Travel ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2009 12:59:25 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5295531&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Lawsuit Calls Infamous KFC Chicken Giveaway A "Bait And Switch" [Debacles] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-18-2009_12-32-42_PM.jpg" width="205" height="205" />TMZ.com is reporting that chicken lovers have become disillusioned with KFC and are suing over the Oprah-endorsed <a class="autolink" title="Click here to read more posts tagged KENTUCKY GRILLED CHICKEN" title="Click here to read more posts tagged KENTUCKY GRILLED CHICKEN" href="http://consumerist.com/tag/kentucky-grilled-chicken/">Kentucky Grilled Chicken</a> giveaway that went so horribly wrong last month.</p> <p>According to TMZ, the lawsuit alleges that the giveaway was a "scam to deceive its customers into spending more dough."</p> <p>From TMZ:</p> <blockquote><p>The suit says this "bait and switch" caused customers to incur "travel costs, paper and printing costs, postage, the money they spent on other food items at KFC on visits when they had intended to redeem the Coupon ... and the loss of the value of the promised Meal."</p></blockquote> <p> What do you think? Are you angry enough at KFC's lack of planning to sue them?</p> <p><script type="text/javascript" language="javascript" charset="utf-8" src="http://static.polldaddy.com/p/1717078.js"></script><noscript><br /> <a href="http://answers.polldaddy.com/poll/1717078/">Do you think KFC deserves to be sued over the chicken debacle?</a><span style="font-size:9px;">(<a href="http://answers.polldaddy.com">opinion</a>)</span><br /> </noscript></p> <p><a href="http://www.tmz.com/2009/06/17/customers-kfc-giveaway-clucked-up-our-lives/">Customers: KFC Giveaway Clucked Up Our Lives</a> [TMZ]<em> (Thanks, J!)</em></p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5295494/lawsuit-calls-infamous-kfc-chicken-giveaway-a-bait-and-switch]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5295494</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Debacles ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ California ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Fast Food ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Kentucky Grilled CHicken ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Lawsuit ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Top ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2009 12:44:03 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5295494&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Continental Pilot Dies Midflight, Crew Lands Jet Safely [Tragic] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-18-2009_12-14-13_PM.jpg" width="168" height="115" />CNN is reporting that the pilot of Continental Flight 61 from Brussels to Newark died midflight, forcing a relief pilot to take over the controls of the Boeing 777. </p> <p>The pilot, who had more than 20 years of service to the airline, died of natural causes. The flight landed safely at Newark.</p> <p><a href="http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/06/18/pilot.dead/">Pilot dies midflight, FAA says</a> [CNN]</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5295455/continental-pilot-dies-midflight-crew-lands-jet-safely]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5295455</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ tragic ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Continental ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Newark ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Pilots ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Sad ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Travel ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2009 12:19:16 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5295455&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Chase Marketing Credit Cards To The "Twilight" Demographic... And Creeping Them Out [Marketing] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-17-2009_10-50-14_AM.jpg" width="249" height="128" />Reader Chloe is a teenager, a college freshman, and she is creeped out by the ads for Chase <a class="autolink" title="Click here to read more posts tagged CREDIT CARDS" title="Click here to read more posts tagged CREDIT CARDS" href="http://consumerist.com/tag/credit-cards/">credit cards</a> that keep popping up on Facebook. Why? Because they want to give her "points" toward Twilight books in exchange for applying for, and using a student credit card.</p> <p>Chloe says:</p> <blockquote><p>I'm not one to start hand-wringing over credit card company marketing tactics, but the new Chase ads that've been popping up on, of all things, Facebook strike me as a new kind of low for them. I can't tell if it's because I'm in the right demographic (young, college freshman, female) or simply happening as a whole, but lo and behold, sponsored ads now appear with the innocuous promise of a free "latest edition of the Twilight series" provided all that you do is take their quiz and, oh, make a purchase with the card they also have you apply for.</p> <p> It's like some semilegal hybrid of the sign-up-for-a-free-gift internet scam and the college-student-prey credit card marketing booths, except that instead of some school branded knick knack you get a book aimed rather squarely at preteen girls....and a nearly 19% variable APR credit card. Hey Chase, some of us teens read the fine print, and we can tell when you're trying to sock it to us....</p></blockquote> <p> We can't tell you how happy we are to get this email, Chloe. It's as if all of our hard work is actually accomplishing something.</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5293917/chase-marketing-credit-cards-to-the-twilight-demographic-and-creeping-them-out]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5293917</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Marketing ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Chase ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Credit Cards ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ twilight ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 11:51:45 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5293917&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Chimichangas Are 20 For $10, Limit 5. What? [Confusing] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-17-2009_11-04-08_AM.jpg" width="350" height="266" />Reader Len is a little confused. To be honest, so are we. </p> <p>Len says:</p> <blockquote><p>I was in my local Bottom Dollar, a low end Food Lion, grocery store (Gaithersburg, MD) and saw the attached pricing. They are selling 20 frozen burritos $10 with your savings card. The only problem is that there is a limit of 5 mix or match.</p> <p>Unfortunately, I did not have time to find out if that was 5 x 20 (100 burritos) or just 5 total.</p></blockquote> <p> We are sort of afraid to meet the person who has to be limited to "only" 100 frozen chimichangas. Ya know?</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5293945/chimichangas-are-20-for-10-limit-5-what]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5293945</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ confusing ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Chimichangas ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Food ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Pricing ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 11:48:46 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5293945&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Frontline Examines The Bank Of America/ Merrill Lynch Merger [Mergers And Acquisitions] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-17-2009_10-21-15_AM.jpg" width="350" height="218" />The merger between <a class="autolink" title="Click here to read more posts tagged MERRILL LYNCH" title="Click here to read more posts tagged MERRILL LYNCH" href="http://consumerist.com/tag/merrill-lynch/">Merrill Lynch</a> and <a class="autolink" title="Click here to read more posts tagged BANK OF AMERICA" title="Click here to read more posts tagged BANK OF AMERICA" href="http://consumerist.com/tag/bank-of-america/">Bank of America</a> was sold to us as a marriage made in heaven that would save the financial system. It wasn't, and it didn't. Now Frontline takes a closer look at the now-infamous debacle that cost tax payers billions &mdash; and CEO <a class="autolink" title="Click here to read more posts tagged KEN LEWIS" title="Click here to read more posts tagged KEN LEWIS" href="http://consumerist.com/tag/ken-lewis/">Ken Lewis</a> his chairmanship.</p> <p>Things we already knew that were confirmed by Frontline:</p> <p><ul><li> <a class="autolink" title="Click here to read more posts tagged JOHN THAIN" title="Click here to read more posts tagged JOHN THAIN" href="http://consumerist.com/tag/john-thain/">John Thain</a>, the former CEO of Merrill Lynch, is a slippery mofo. <li> Hearing Ken Lewis describe sh*tcanning John Thain is as fun as you think it will be. <li> Hearing John Thain describe being sh*tcanned by Ken Lewis is equally fun. <li> Bank of America was too eager to show Wall Street who was boss &mdash; and ended up stuck with Merrill. <li> Merrill Lynch executives were more interested in their own compensation than pretty much anything else. <li> Paulson thought the merger would stop the financial crisis and restore confidence to the markets even though Lehman Brothers went under. Paulson was not correct. <li> Austan Goolsbee says funny things in interviews. </ul></p> <p><script type="text/javascript" src="http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/js/pap/embed.js?frol02c29c2q9d7"></script></p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5293904/frontline-examines-the-bank-of-america-merrill-lynch-merger]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5293904</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Mergers and Acquisitions ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Bank of America ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Boa ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ CEOs ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ john thain ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ ken lewis ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Merrill Lynch ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 11:29:08 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5293904&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Venezuela Bans Coke Zero [Junk Food] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-16-2009_4-32-36_PM.jpg" height="221" width="168" />The AP is reporting that Venezuela has banned <a class="autolink" title="Click here to read more posts tagged COKE ZERO" title="Click here to read more posts tagged COKE ZERO" href="http://consumerist.com/tag/coke-zero/">Coke Zero</a> because the company allegedly didn't declare a potentially harmful artificial sweetener when it "received its initial health permit to begin selling the product in April."</p> <p>Coke denies that the sweetener in question, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclamate">sodium cyclamate,</a> is even in the beverage. <a class="autolink" title="Click here to read more posts tagged SODIUM CYCLAMATE" title="Click here to read more posts tagged SODIUM CYCLAMATE" href="http://consumerist.com/tag/sodium-cyclamate/">Sodium cyclamate</a> is legal in Venezuela, but not in the U.S. </p> <p>The AP says:</p> <blockquote><p>The U.S. prohibits the use of cyclamates in human food because of health safety concerns. Sales of Coca-Cola Zero elsewhere in Latin America have met with resistance over the sweetener's use.</p> <p>But Rosy Alvarez, a spokeswoman for Coca-Cola Servicios de Venezuela, told The Associated Press on Thursday that Coca-Cola Zero sold in Venezuela uses other artificial sweeteners.</p> <p>"No ingredient of Coca-Cola Zero is harmful to peoples' health," she said</p></blockquote> <p> The Venezuelan government says that tests show Coke Zero contains the sweetener. </p> <p><a href="http://www.myfoxatlanta.com/dpp/news/Venezuela_Bans_Coca_Cola_061309">Venezuela Bans Coca-Cola</a> [MyFoxAtlanta]</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5292955/venezuela-bans-coke-zero]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5292955</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Junk Food ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Banned ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ coke zero ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Sodium cyclamate ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 16:44:04 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5292955&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ FDA: Stop Using Zicam Nasal Gel, It's Associated With Loss Of Sense Of Smell [Recalls] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-16-2009_2-43-47_PM.jpg" height="174" width="168" />The FDA has recommended that consumers stop using several different Zicam products because they have been associated with the <a class="autolink" title="Click here to read more posts tagged LOSS OF SMELL" title="Click here to read more posts tagged LOSS OF SMELL" href="http://consumerist.com/tag/loss-of-smell/">loss of smell</a> (anosmia). Anosmia may be long-lasting or<strong> permanent.</strong></p> <p>The FDA says it has received more than 130 reports of loss of sense of smell associated with the use of three Zicam products:</p> <p>Zicam <a class="autolink" title="Click here to read more posts tagged COLD REMEDY" title="Click here to read more posts tagged COLD REMEDY" href="http://consumerist.com/tag/cold-remedy/">Cold Remedy</a> Nasal Gel<br /> Zicam Cold Remedy Nasal Swabs<br /> Zicam Cold Remedy Swabs, Kids Size (a discontinued product)</p> <p>The FDA says that some of the cases occurred after only one dose. </p> <blockquote><p> "Loss of sense of smell is a serious risk for people who use these products for relief from cold symptoms," said Janet Woodcock, M.D., director of the FDA's Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER). "We are concerned that consumers may unknowingly use a product that could cause serious harm, and therefore we are advising them not to use these products for any reason."</p></blockquote> <p><a href="http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm167065.htm">FDA Advises Consumers Not To Use Certain Zicam Cold Remedies<br /> Intranasal Zinc Product Linked to Loss of Sense of Smell</a> [FDA]</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5292846/fda-stop-using-zicam-nasal-gel-its-associated-with-loss-of-sense-of-smell]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5292846</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Recalls ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ cold remedy ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Loss of smell ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Top ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Zicam ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Zicam nasal gel ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 14:56:52 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5292846&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ El Pollo Loco Mocks KFC For Using Beef Ingredients In Their "Grilled" Chicken [Chicken Wars] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-16-2009_12-08-49_PM.jpg" height="129" width="168" />Grilled chicken competitor <a class="autolink" title="Click here to read more posts tagged EL POLLO LOCO" title="Click here to read more posts tagged EL POLLO LOCO" href="http://consumerist.com/tag/el-pollo-loco/">El Pollo Loco</a> is launching a new ad campaign in which they call out KFC for using "beef powder" and "rendered beef fat" in their new "grilled" chicken, says the LA Times.</p> <p>The use of beef ingredients in grilled chicken just seems wrong to me, and we believe most consumers would agree," said Steve Carley, CEO of El Pollo Loco. </p> <p>KFC doesn't see what the big deal is. "Small amounts of beef flavors are commonly used in seasonings for many food products, for both restaurant and retail use," a spokesperson for the chain told the LA Times. </p> <p>"For <a class="autolink" title="Click here to read more posts tagged KENTUCKY GRILLED CHICKEN" title="Click here to read more posts tagged KENTUCKY GRILLED CHICKEN" href="http://consumerist.com/tag/kentucky-grilled-chicken/">Kentucky Grilled Chicken</a>'s topical seasoning, beef flavors account for only 0.2% of the total seasoning," he added.</p> <p>Still, El Pollo Loco thinks people will want beef-free chicken. You can check out their new ad campaign at their new website: <a href="http://beefychicken.com/">Beefychicken.com.</a></p> <p><a href="http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-kfc13-2009jun13,0,2676386.story">El Pollo Loco has a beef with KFC's grilled chicken</a> [LA Times] <em>(Thanks, Cy Guy!)</em></p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5292640/el-pollo-loco-mocks-kfc-for-using-beef-ingredients-in-their-grilled-chicken]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5292640</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Chicken wars ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Chicken ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ El pollo loco ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Fast Food ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Kentucky Grilled CHicken ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 12:20:47 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5292640&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Comcast Takes Setting Your House On Fire "Very Seriously" [Taking It Seriously] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-16-2009_11-41-04_AM.jpg" height="132" width="241" />If a Comcast subcontractor accidentally drills into your electrical box and sets fire to your home &mdash; rest assured that the company will take it seriously. One Pennsylvania homeowner is feeling the seriousness right now. It all started when she asked Comcast to install a cable outlet in her kitchen, and it ended with smoke and flames and $20,000 in damage.</p> <p>From the Pottstown Mercury:</p> <blockquote><p>"I called Comcast because I wanted the kitchen TV hooked up to cable," she said, describing how the digital TV converter box hadn't worked as planned. "They said no problem, we can do it, no extra charge." Tyson was already a Comcast subscriber before the incident Monday.</p> <p>"They drilled right into the electrical box," Tyson said in disbelief, looking over at the side of her home where a long black burn mark extended up to the roof from a burnt electrical box and meter.</p></blockquote> <p> Luckily, she had a fire extinguisher handy or the damage might have been much worse. As it is, a local Fire Marshall told the paper that the damage was probably about $20,000 &mdash; and that Tyson would have to live somewhere else while the repairs are being made. </p> <p>Comcast says they're taking all of this very seriously:</p> <blockquote><p>"Our first priority is the comfort and well-being of our customer and dog. The first thing we did was to offer accommodations while repairs are made to the home.</p> <p>"We take this matter very seriously," [a Comcast spokesperson] said. "We are going to review the details of the fire with the contractor and local officials as they investigate." </p></blockquote> <p><a href="http://pottsmerc.com/articles/2009/06/16/news/srv0000005599811.txt">House fire started by cable worker</a> [Pottstown Mercury] <em>(Thanks, Ed!)</em><br /> (Photo:<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/cubicleman/393788467/">Tyler Yip</a>)</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5292608/comcast-takes-setting-your-house-on-fire-very-seriously]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5292608</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ taking it seriously ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Accidents ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Cable ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Comcast ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Fires ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 11:57:10 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5292608&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Advice: If the Walmart employees tell you ... [Bad Consumer] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p>Advice: If the Walmart employees tell you that you can't drink alcohol while waiting to have your car serviced, don't respond by ripping a telephone out of the wall. [<a href="http://www2.hernandotoday.com/content/2009/jun/15/intoxicated-woman-wal-mart-charged-criminal-mischi/">Hernando Today</a> via <a href="http://www.fark.com/cgi/comments.pl?IDLink=4450691&tt=s">Fark</a>]</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5292517/]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5292517</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ bad consumer ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Alcohol ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Walmart ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 10:38:19 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5292517&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Saved From Flat Tire Hell By The CVS "Samaritan Van" [Above And Beyond] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-15-2009_6-27-49_PM.jpg" width="237" height="177" />Did you know that there was a fleet of CVS "Samaritan Vans" that patrol the highways looking for motorists in need of help? We didn't, until reader Danielle let us know she'd been saved by one.</p> <p>Danielle says:</p> <blockquote><p>On Friday night around 5:30 I got a flat tire on a very busy Washington DC area highway. I know I should know how to change a flat tire, but I have roadside assistance through my insurance and warranty so I never worried about it. I called my husband who works on the other side of town and he said he'd try to come over instead of having to use roadside assistance, which would probably take even longer.</p> <p>I waited for about 5 minutes when a CVS Good Samaritan van pulled up. The gentleman, Ernie introduced himself and got right down to business to put on my spare. He even apologized for being tied up with another driver farther back. He told me I could call my husband and tell him not to worry. 5 minutes later my tire was fixed and I was on my way. CVS only asks that you fill out a postage paid comment card. Because of this service I will definitely be shopping at CVS more often. Thanks to CVS and to Ernie, who helped me out of a jam on Southbound 395.</p></blockquote> <p> These random acts of kindness have apparently been going <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS154205+06-Feb-2008+PRN20080206">on for over 30 years, according to this press release. </a></p> <p>Ernie is like a superhero. Hooray for Ernie.</p> <p><a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS154205+06-Feb-2008+PRN20080206">CVS Samaritan Van Program Celebrates 30 Years of Helping Motorists on the Nation's...</a> [Reuters]<br /> (Photo:<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/daquellamanera/1184913889/">daquellamanera</a>)</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5291712/saved-from-flat-tire-hell-by-the-cvs-samaritan-van]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5291712</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Above and Beyond ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Cvs ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Cvs samaritan van ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ good ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2009 18:39:23 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5291712&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ Target Is Somewhat Liberal When It Comes To "Kids" Programming [Silly] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p>Hey, where was Target back in the day when our parents were looking for a babysitter? The one we had wouldn't let us watch anything cool. Certainly not anything with a huge "CENSORED" sticker on the front of it.</p> <p>Tell us, is there anything actually raunchy on that Family Guy box, or are they just teasing?</p> <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-15-2009_5-54-29_PM.jpg" align="left" hspace="4" vspace="2" width="540" height="424" style="display:block;" /></p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5291678/target-is-somewhat-liberal-when-it-comes-to-kids-programming]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5291678</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Silly ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ DVDs ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Entertainment ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Kids ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Target ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2009 18:25:21 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5291678&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
        			
																							
		<item>
			<title><![CDATA[ 170 Bogus Tickets: Chicago Tests Ticketing Equipment With Your License Plate [Illinois] ]]></title>
			<description><![CDATA[ <p><img src="http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/consumerist/2009/06/6-15-2009_3-04-50_PM.jpg" width="180" height="236" />When I read the <a href="http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2009/06/15/0-plate-gets-170-mistaken-tickets/UPI-36451245075178/">headline for this story</a> (it didn't mention Chicago), I bet myself a million dollars that the man had an Illinois license plate. I am now a millionaire. Or I will be as soon as I pay myself. </p> <p>Meet Tom. He is the proud owner of the license plate "0." His family has had the plate for 40 years. Apparently, it didn't occur to the City of Chicago to check to see if someone was using the "0" license plate before they decided to use it to test their ticketing equipment.</p> <p>Since 1997, Tom has been receiving all kinds of tickets. Parking tickets. Expired meter tickets. Street sweeping tickets. Tickets for running stop signs and red lights. He's even gotten tickets for parking his taxi on a residential street. Though the article doesn't specifically mention it, he doesn't seem own a taxi. He also probably doesn't own a bus, but he has a ticket for parking one illegally. </p> <p>UPI says that Tom has been trying to clear up the issue, (for 12 years, we assume) but has so far been unable to get anyone to help him. Until now, of course.</p> <p>"The test violations should have been dismissed in the database. The majority of the cases (Tom) contested successfully. But we are taking steps to rectify the situation so in the future an actual registered plate number will not be used to do the testing," Revenue Department spokesman Ed Walsh told the <em>Chicago Tribune.</em> He said that the Department of Revenue was unaware that the "0" plate was in circulation. </p> <p><a href="http://www.upi.com/Odd_News/2009/06/15/0-plate-gets-170-mistaken-tickets/UPI-36451245075178/">'0' plate gets 170 mistaken tickets</a> [UPI via <a href="http://www.fark.com/cgi/comments.pl?IDLink=4449427&tt=s">Fark</a>]<br /> (Photo:<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/mlehet/33289225/">Michael_Lehet</a>)</p> ]]></description>
			<link><![CDATA[http://consumerist.com/5291476/170-bogus-tickets-chicago-tests-ticketing-equipment-with-your-license-plate]]></link>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">Consumerist-5291476</guid>
			<category><![CDATA[ Illinois ]]></category>
			<category><![CDATA[ Chicago ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Government ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ License Plates ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Stupid ]]></category>			
			<category><![CDATA[ Tickets ]]></category>			
			<pubDate>Mon, 15 Jun 2009 15:17:06 EDT</pubDate>
			<dc:creator>Meg Marco</dc:creator>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://consumerist.com/index.php?op=postcommentfeed&amp;postId=5291476&amp;view=rss&amp;microfeed=true</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
    
			</channel>
</rss>