So how SHOULD we deal with RSS?
I was reading Dave Slusher’s site this afternoon, and as one of his new year’s “resolutions”, he said that he would be removing sites from his RSS aggregator that didn’t offer the full text of articles in their RSS feed.
This joins an interesting conversation, and is one that we have had trouble answering for years (over at The Mac Observer, that is). TMO is, of course, an advertiser-supported site and has been since its inception. While we work to keep the lines between advertising and content delivery as thick as possible, there are some realities to face. Our RSS feeds don’t (currently) have any ads in them, and as such we have always just posted the snippet/teaser to the article (the same piece that appears on the home page of the site). The entire text is then available when you click through. This way people get to peruse the site in their aggregator and, if they find something interesting, come to the site to participate more and, “pay” for the content they’re reading (by “pay” I mean “allow us to show them advertisements of our choice”).
However, this is a policy we instituted years ago, and RSS has most definitely matured since then, in that people are using it *very* differently than they used to (en masse, anyway).
So are RSS ads the solution? Do they actually work? This is an experiment we’ll definitely be doing more of, but I’m not yet convinced that’s the answer. Are you?
Technorati Tags: advertising, dave slusher, evil genius chronicles, mac observer, RSS, web advertising
January 2nd, 2006 at 7:06 pm
My opinion; hell no. I don’t think any current thinking on advertising revenue will last too much longer. People are getting tired of it. While this seems off topic, it’s not really so bare with me and consider the meaning of this example:
The other night I was watching a 1 hour show on a local TV channel here in Britain called Top Gear. It’s about cars. In that hour we had 5 sets of 4 minutes of adverts before the show ended 9 minutes early, followed by 9 minutes of ads. It was also late starting thanks to advertising. In each set of commercials there was at least 2 for two different tampon firms. It’s a car show aimed at young boys through middle-aged men. “Demographic” anyone?
This is the reason that people are getting annoyed with advertising; it’s taking over our lives in a non-helpful way. It’s getting in the way of our content, not just of the show or article but the content of our lives. Too much, too often, too repetitive and no effort what-so-ever.
More than that however there is a problem with mindless advertising that costs you personally dearly. During that TV programme I payed no attention to the tampon adverts and by default walked out of the room for the rest of them. No one made money from me. If they aren’t advertising to the right people, they aren’t making money. If they aren’t making money they aren’t paying you (the medium) well enough. Apple on the other hand had the 1984 advert as a one off, during the Super-Bowl and it was one of the most successful commercials of all time. Same with Guinness targeting demographics and making quality adverts we talk about; that makes money.
Before I post any true thoughts on the future of advertising and where I can see it going I would like to ask you a question however, to clarify something for me or else I will have to revise my thoughts. I will E-mail you in a minute and wrap this up pending a reply. In brief though; I know where you are coming from and I appreciate it, but I don’t think RSS advertising is the way forward for anyone.
January 2nd, 2006 at 11:06 pm
My opinion; hell no. I don’t think any current thinking on advertising revenue will last too much longer. People are getting tired of it. While this seems off topic, it’s not really so bare with me and consider the meaning of this example:
The other night I was watching a 1 hour show on a local TV channel here in Britain called Top Gear. It’s about cars. In that hour we had 5 sets of 4 minutes of adverts before the show ended 9 minutes early, followed by 9 minutes of ads. It was also late starting thanks to advertising. In each set of commercials there was at least 2 for two different tampon firms. It’s a car show aimed at young boys through middle-aged men. “Demographic” anyone?
This is the reason that people are getting annoyed with advertising; it’s taking over our lives in a non-helpful way. It’s getting in the way of our content, not just of the show or article but the content of our lives. Too much, too often, too repetitive and no effort what-so-ever.
More than that however there is a problem with mindless advertising that costs you personally dearly. During that TV programme I payed no attention to the tampon adverts and by default walked out of the room for the rest of them. No one made money from me. If they aren’t advertising to the right people, they aren’t making money. If they aren’t making money they aren’t paying you (the medium) well enough. Apple on the other hand had the 1984 advert as a one off, during the Super-Bowl and it was one of the most successful commercials of all time. Same with Guinness targeting demographics and making quality adverts we talk about; that makes money.
Before I post any true thoughts on the future of advertising and where I can see it going I would like to ask you a question however, to clarify something for me or else I will have to revise my thoughts. I will E-mail you in a minute and wrap this up pending a reply. In brief though; I know where you are coming from and I appreciate it, but I don’t think RSS advertising is the way forward for anyone.
January 3rd, 2006 at 3:08 am
I believe Dave was asking about RSS ads in relation to the idea of providing all of our content via RSS, which is a slightly different question than should one have ads in RSS the way TMO publishes RSS feeds currently.
For us, there is no point in publishing content without ads. No ads = no revenue = no staff = no content = obvious and vicious circle.
So, Dave Winer can go #%*& himself.
No, seriously.
I wouldn’t be keen on putting ads into an RSS headline-only feed, but if our readers truly wanted to read the entire story in an RSS reader, we’d simply have to include an ad with it, and I would certainly be willing to do that.
January 3rd, 2006 at 7:08 am
I believe Dave was asking about RSS ads in relation to the idea of providing all of our content via RSS, which is a slightly different question than should one have ads in RSS the way TMO publishes RSS feeds currently.
For us, there is no point in publishing content without ads. No ads = no revenue = no staff = no content = obvious and vicious circle.
So, Dave Winer can go #%*& himself.
No, seriously.
I wouldn’t be keen on putting ads into an RSS headline-only feed, but if our readers truly wanted to read the entire story in an RSS reader, we’d simply have to include an ad with it, and I would certainly be willing to do that.
January 3rd, 2006 at 1:16 pm
Actually, Bryan, I had a brief e-mail conversation with Dave Winer about this a few months back and he (nearly verbatim, in fact) agreed with everything you said here: either put the teaser in the feed, or put the whole article in the feed along with a (relevant) ad. 🙂
January 3rd, 2006 at 5:16 pm
Actually, Bryan, I had a brief e-mail conversation with Dave Winer about this a few months back and he (nearly verbatim, in fact) agreed with everything you said here: either put the teaser in the feed, or put the whole article in the feed along with a (relevant) ad. 🙂
January 3rd, 2006 at 1:30 pm
I think you will eventually have to insert ads into your RSS feeds simply to avoid the fact that a small cadre of people will pick up your site that way and forgo your front page. So as such, you need to insert ads even into your current rss style. As far as going for full feeds and ads in those feeds, that is a tough issue, especially with the big increase lately of splogs that steal content via RSS (I mean whole articles). The real question is what are the numbers of people reading the site first through RSS and not the site? Would you be alienating a substantial portion of your readers by inserting ads?
Good luck with the decision. I for one feel you HAVE to monetize your content, as without it, there is no way to keep doing business.
January 3rd, 2006 at 5:30 pm
I think you will eventually have to insert ads into your RSS feeds simply to avoid the fact that a small cadre of people will pick up your site that way and forgo your front page. So as such, you need to insert ads even into your current rss style. As far as going for full feeds and ads in those feeds, that is a tough issue, especially with the big increase lately of splogs that steal content via RSS (I mean whole articles). The real question is what are the numbers of people reading the site first through RSS and not the site? Would you be alienating a substantial portion of your readers by inserting ads?
Good luck with the decision. I for one feel you HAVE to monetize your content, as without it, there is no way to keep doing business.
January 3rd, 2006 at 4:10 pm
Dave,
About your response to Bryan’s comment.
Does Dave Winer agreeing with “everything [Bryan] said [above]” include the “Dave Winer can go #%*& himself” bit?
January 3rd, 2006 at 8:10 pm
Dave,About your response to Bryan’s comment.
Does Dave Winer agreeing with “everything [Bryan] said [above]” include the “Dave Winer can go #%*& himself” bit?
January 4th, 2006 at 4:57 am
Well, I may have been hasty in my suggestions for Mr. Winer if he agrees with me… 🙂
Let it never be said, however, that I hold back, even when I am mistaken or wrong!
And that gets another :-).
January 4th, 2006 at 8:57 am
Well, I may have been hasty in my suggestions for Mr. Winer if he agrees with me… 🙂
Let it never be said, however, that I hold back, even when I am mistaken or wrong!
And that gets another :-).
February 26th, 2006 at 8:47 am
Ads in RSS are inevitable. Anyone who says so is either resting on their laurels and already successful (Dave Winer) or a pie-in-the-sky idealist. Every medium in history becomes a platform for ads.
In many ways this sounds like the same arguments against the commericalization of the web back in the old days. I agree with Bryan. No revenue=no content for most of us out there.
As for full feeds I’m also opposed to this. RSS should be a way for the user to get a quick summary of what is the latest and greatest on the website.
February 26th, 2006 at 1:47 pm
Ads in RSS are inevitable. Anyone who says so is either resting on their laurels and already successful (Dave Winer) or a pie-in-the-sky idealist. Every medium in history becomes a platform for ads.
In many ways this sounds like the same arguments against the commericalization of the web back in the old days. I agree with Bryan. No revenue=no content for most of us out there.
As for full feeds I’m also opposed to this. RSS should be a way for the user to get a quick summary of what is the latest and greatest on the website.