John doesn’t want everything to be full-text

Blog Tips, Russia

Disclaimer, John Roberts works for CNET, which doesn’t provide full-text. Today he wrote that he disagrees with me about full-text feeds.

I really try to avoid non-full-text feeds. I deleted many feeds I like that aren’t full text (like Shelley Powers’ feed, Chris Pirillo’s feeds, and Jeffrey Zeldman’s feeds — all of which I deleted from my daily reading). Why? Because there are so many great feeds out there that I just don’t have time for people who don’t treat me the way I want to be treated.

See I use NewsGator. It only shows me headlines in one pane and the content in another pane. So I can scan feeds very quickly — even though they are full-text feeds.

I find that full-text feeds actually make it FASTER to scan. Why? Cause all the content is pre-loaded for me. Partial text feeds required me to click a link and wait for my browser to load.

Update: Steve Gillmor says that John is beating a dead horse.

138 thoughts on “John doesn’t want everything to be full-text”

  1. Pingback: Null Bit Me » Just subscribed to NewsGator

  23. Scoble. I totally agree. I also unsubscribed from Chris Pirilo — actually before you even wrote this post over the very thing, lack of full feeds. I suppose if I found someone super compelling I’d probably still hang on to the feed. In general though if it doesn’t have full feeds I’m pretty much not going to read it. It’s rare that something brilliant enough isn’t picked up by someone else.

    Plus throw in things like Memeorandum and Digg now and it’s even that much harder to keep up on RSS reading.

    Right now I,m organizing my RSS feeds into 10 folders based on where my blogging interest is at the present time.

    1. Flickr News (Technorati, PubSub, Google, etc. searches, Flickr staff blogs, flickr blog, etc.) I use this for my FlickrNation blog and podcast.

    2. Flickr Photo Blogs (great way to track terrific photos blogged from flickr by various bloggers)

    3. Microsoft News (same Technorati, PubSub, Google, Yahoo! etc. searches plus things like Mary Jo Foley, and Todd Bishop and Neowin, etc.)

    4. Music and mp3 blogs (copy, right is my favorite)

    5. Photography (general photography blogs)

    6. Podcasts (where I collect the podcasts that I download regularly)

    7. San Francisco (regional stuff)

    8. Short List (my most commonly viewed folder, stuff that I have to see every day including your own blog)

    9. Long List (other good in my opinion 2nd tier blogs and sites for when I have time)

    10. Fresh List (where I put great new feeds that I find. They stay there until I decide if I should put them in the short list, long list, or toss them.)

    At present I’m subscribed to about 209 feeds. I find this is the best organizational structure that works for me.

  24. Scoble. I totally agree. I also unsubscribed from Chris Pirilo — actually before you even wrote this post over the very thing, lack of full feeds. I suppose if I found someone super compelling I’d probably still hang on to the feed. In general though if it doesn’t have full feeds I’m pretty much not going to read it. It’s rare that something brilliant enough isn’t picked up by someone else.

    Plus throw in things like Memeorandum and Digg now and it’s even that much harder to keep up on RSS reading.

    Right now I,m organizing my RSS feeds into 10 folders based on where my blogging interest is at the present time.

    1. Flickr News (Technorati, PubSub, Google, etc. searches, Flickr staff blogs, flickr blog, etc.) I use this for my FlickrNation blog and podcast.

    2. Flickr Photo Blogs (great way to track terrific photos blogged from flickr by various bloggers)

    3. Microsoft News (same Technorati, PubSub, Google, Yahoo! etc. searches plus things like Mary Jo Foley, and Todd Bishop and Neowin, etc.)

    4. Music and mp3 blogs (copy, right is my favorite)

    5. Photography (general photography blogs)

    6. Podcasts (where I collect the podcasts that I download regularly)

    7. San Francisco (regional stuff)

    8. Short List (my most commonly viewed folder, stuff that I have to see every day including your own blog)

    9. Long List (other good in my opinion 2nd tier blogs and sites for when I have time)

    10. Fresh List (where I put great new feeds that I find. They stay there until I decide if I should put them in the short list, long list, or toss them.)

    At present I’m subscribed to about 209 feeds. I find this is the best organizational structure that works for me.

  25. Scoble. I totally agree. I also unsubscribed from Chris Pirilo — actually before you even wrote this post over the very thing, lack of full feeds. I suppose if I found someone super compelling I’d probably still hang on to the feed. In general though if it doesn’t have full feeds I’m pretty much not going to read it. It’s rare that something brilliant enough isn’t picked up by someone else.

    Plus throw in things like Memeorandum and Digg now and it’s even that much harder to keep up on RSS reading.

    Right now I,m organizing my RSS feeds into 10 folders based on where my blogging interest is at the present time.

    1. Flickr News (Technorati, PubSub, Google, etc. searches, Flickr staff blogs, flickr blog, etc.) I use this for my FlickrNation blog and podcast.

    2. Flickr Photo Blogs (great way to track terrific photos blogged from flickr by various bloggers)

    3. Microsoft News (same Technorati, PubSub, Google, Yahoo! etc. searches plus things like Mary Jo Foley, and Todd Bishop and Neowin, etc.)

    4. Music and mp3 blogs (copy, right is my favorite)

    5. Photography (general photography blogs)

    6. Podcasts (where I collect the podcasts that I download regularly)

    7. San Francisco (regional stuff)

    8. Short List (my most commonly viewed folder, stuff that I have to see every day including your own blog)

    9. Long List (other good in my opinion 2nd tier blogs and sites for when I have time)

    10. Fresh List (where I put great new feeds that I find. They stay there until I decide if I should put them in the short list, long list, or toss them.)

    At present I’m subscribed to about 209 feeds. I find this is the best organizational structure that works for me.

  26. Scoble. I totally agree. I also unsubscribed from Chris Pirilo — actually before you even wrote this post over the very thing, lack of full feeds. I suppose if I found someone super compelling I’d probably still hang on to the feed. In general though if it doesn’t have full feeds I’m pretty much not going to read it. It’s rare that something brilliant enough isn’t picked up by someone else.

    Plus throw in things like Memeorandum and Digg now and it’s even that much harder to keep up on RSS reading.

    Right now I,m organizing my RSS feeds into 10 folders based on where my blogging interest is at the present time.

    1. Flickr News (Technorati, PubSub, Google, etc. searches, Flickr staff blogs, flickr blog, etc.) I use this for my FlickrNation blog and podcast.

    2. Flickr Photo Blogs (great way to track terrific photos blogged from flickr by various bloggers)

    3. Microsoft News (same Technorati, PubSub, Google, Yahoo! etc. searches plus things like Mary Jo Foley, and Todd Bishop and Neowin, etc.)

    4. Music and mp3 blogs (copy, right is my favorite)

    5. Photography (general photography blogs)

    6. Podcasts (where I collect the podcasts that I download regularly)

    7. San Francisco (regional stuff)

    8. Short List (my most commonly viewed folder, stuff that I have to see every day including your own blog)

    9. Long List (other good in my opinion 2nd tier blogs and sites for when I have time)

    10. Fresh List (where I put great new feeds that I find. They stay there until I decide if I should put them in the short list, long list, or toss them.)

    At present I’m subscribed to about 209 feeds. I find this is the best organizational structure that works for me.

  27. Scoble. I totally agree. I also unsubscribed from Chris Pirilo — actually before you even wrote this post over the very thing, lack of full feeds. I suppose if I found someone super compelling I’d probably still hang on to the feed. In general though if it doesn’t have full feeds I’m pretty much not going to read it. It’s rare that something brilliant enough isn’t picked up by someone else.

    Plus throw in things like Memeorandum and Digg now and it’s even that much harder to keep up on RSS reading.

    Right now I,m organizing my RSS feeds into 10 folders based on where my blogging interest is at the present time.

    1. Flickr News (Technorati, PubSub, Google, etc. searches, Flickr staff blogs, flickr blog, etc.) I use this for my FlickrNation blog and podcast.

    2. Flickr Photo Blogs (great way to track terrific photos blogged from flickr by various bloggers)

    3. Microsoft News (same Technorati, PubSub, Google, Yahoo! etc. searches plus things like Mary Jo Foley, and Todd Bishop and Neowin, etc.)

    4. Music and mp3 blogs (copy, right is my favorite)

    5. Photography (general photography blogs)

    6. Podcasts (where I collect the podcasts that I download regularly)

    7. San Francisco (regional stuff)

    8. Short List (my most commonly viewed folder, stuff that I have to see every day including your own blog)

    9. Long List (other good in my opinion 2nd tier blogs and sites for when I have time)

    10. Fresh List (where I put great new feeds that I find. They stay there until I decide if I should put them in the short list, long list, or toss them.)

    At present I’m subscribed to about 209 feeds. I find this is the best organizational structure that works for me.

  28. -
    Why? Because there are so many great feeds out there that I just don’t have time for people who don’t treat me the way I want to be treated.
    -
    and
    -
    I think we all know why most of the folks don’t include the full text (like CNN giving article title only). They want you to go see their ADS. There, I said it. It’s true, we all know it. I don’t want ADS. I don’t care about ADS. I don’t care that they want me to see their ADS.
    -
    WOW. I can’t believe how much entitlement there is here. You want it all, the way you want, and for free. Not cost to you. You just want to sit there and consume. “Give me stuff! I’m entitled to it!”

    Fair enough, your choice, and there is content available out there without ads and without cost. But if you cry when daddy takes the T-bird away, you’ll deserve a smack on the mouth.

  29. -
    Why? Because there are so many great feeds out there that I just don’t have time for people who don’t treat me the way I want to be treated.
    -
    and
    -
    I think we all know why most of the folks don’t include the full text (like CNN giving article title only). They want you to go see their ADS. There, I said it. It’s true, we all know it. I don’t want ADS. I don’t care about ADS. I don’t care that they want me to see their ADS.
    -
    WOW. I can’t believe how much entitlement there is here. You want it all, the way you want, and for free. Not cost to you. You just want to sit there and consume. “Give me stuff! I’m entitled to it!”

    Fair enough, your choice, and there is content available out there without ads and without cost. But if you cry when daddy takes the T-bird away, you’ll deserve a smack on the mouth.

  30. -
    Why? Because there are so many great feeds out there that I just don’t have time for people who don’t treat me the way I want to be treated.
    -
    and
    -
    I think we all know why most of the folks don’t include the full text (like CNN giving article title only). They want you to go see their ADS. There, I said it. It’s true, we all know it. I don’t want ADS. I don’t care about ADS. I don’t care that they want me to see their ADS.
    -
    WOW. I can’t believe how much entitlement there is here. You want it all, the way you want, and for free. Not cost to you. You just want to sit there and consume. “Give me stuff! I’m entitled to it!”

    Fair enough, your choice, and there is content available out there without ads and without cost. But if you cry when daddy takes the T-bird away, you’ll deserve a smack on the mouth.

  31. -
    Why? Because there are so many great feeds out there that I just don’t have time for people who don’t treat me the way I want to be treated.
    -
    and
    -
    I think we all know why most of the folks don’t include the full text (like CNN giving article title only). They want you to go see their ADS. There, I said it. It’s true, we all know it. I don’t want ADS. I don’t care about ADS. I don’t care that they want me to see their ADS.
    -
    WOW. I can’t believe how much entitlement there is here. You want it all, the way you want, and for free. Not cost to you. You just want to sit there and consume. “Give me stuff! I’m entitled to it!”

    Fair enough, your choice, and there is content available out there without ads and without cost. But if you cry when daddy takes the T-bird away, you’ll deserve a smack on the mouth.

  32. -
    Why? Because there are so many great feeds out there that I just don’t have time for people who don’t treat me the way I want to be treated.
    -
    and
    -
    I think we all know why most of the folks don’t include the full text (like CNN giving article title only). They want you to go see their ADS. There, I said it. It’s true, we all know it. I don’t want ADS. I don’t care about ADS. I don’t care that they want me to see their ADS.
    -
    WOW. I can’t believe how much entitlement there is here. You want it all, the way you want, and for free. Not cost to you. You just want to sit there and consume. “Give me stuff! I’m entitled to it!”

    Fair enough, your choice, and there is content available out there without ads and without cost. But if you cry when daddy takes the T-bird away, you’ll deserve a smack on the mouth.

  33. -
    Why? Because there are so many great feeds out there that I just don’t have time for people who don’t treat me the way I want to be treated.
    -
    and
    -
    I think we all know why most of the folks don’t include the full text (like CNN giving article title only). They want you to go see their ADS. There, I said it. It’s true, we all know it. I don’t want ADS. I don’t care about ADS. I don’t care that they want me to see their ADS.
    -
    WOW. I can’t believe how much entitlement there is here. You want it all, the way you want, and for free. Not cost to you. You just want to sit there and consume. “Give me stuff! I’m entitled to it!”

    Fair enough, your choice, and there is content available out there without ads and without cost. But if you cry when daddy takes the T-bird away, you’ll deserve a smack on the mouth.

  34. I work at a pretty large web site and have a pretty good feeling that we’re not going to go full text in the near future because it’s disruptive to the business model (advertising) that our entire site is built on.

    When you’re a blogger like Scoble and are building your site out for professional reputation or even just passion, it’s easy to demand that everyone have full text feeds. When tens of thousands of dollars are in the balance daily for ad revenues alone, it makes things a little different.

    I know people are supposed to embrace the disruptive and popular technologies or else be called “dinosaurs” but when you’re in a conference room trying to sell the idea that, hey, let’s put our full stories in our RSS feeds, you get very concerned stares back at you asking very good, reasonable questions. These questions don’t fear the disruption… they’re asking how to handle it. At which point, I read Scoble and Gillmor and see that they’ve got nothing to contribute to that answer.

    I understand it’s what you want, but I look out at the marketplace and see that the most mainstream RSS aggregators, My Yahoo and Google IG, make the full text feed more or less useless. I have traffic numbers to show that the launch of My Yahoo, for example, is noticeable in our RSS traffic.

    Just a thought…. I’m generally with you on this, Robert, but contextual ads and those type of ads-in-RSS don’t really replace the revenue that might be lost from lost ad impressions. Second, the market so far is showing that full text feeds aren’t that important (see My Yahoo/Google IG).

    Sujal

  35. I work at a pretty large web site and have a pretty good feeling that we’re not going to go full text in the near future because it’s disruptive to the business model (advertising) that our entire site is built on.

    When you’re a blogger like Scoble and are building your site out for professional reputation or even just passion, it’s easy to demand that everyone have full text feeds. When tens of thousands of dollars are in the balance daily for ad revenues alone, it makes things a little different.

    I know people are supposed to embrace the disruptive and popular technologies or else be called “dinosaurs” but when you’re in a conference room trying to sell the idea that, hey, let’s put our full stories in our RSS feeds, you get very concerned stares back at you asking very good, reasonable questions. These questions don’t fear the disruption… they’re asking how to handle it. At which point, I read Scoble and Gillmor and see that they’ve got nothing to contribute to that answer.

    I understand it’s what you want, but I look out at the marketplace and see that the most mainstream RSS aggregators, My Yahoo and Google IG, make the full text feed more or less useless. I have traffic numbers to show that the launch of My Yahoo, for example, is noticeable in our RSS traffic.

    Just a thought…. I’m generally with you on this, Robert, but contextual ads and those type of ads-in-RSS don’t really replace the revenue that might be lost from lost ad impressions. Second, the market so far is showing that full text feeds aren’t that important (see My Yahoo/Google IG).

    Sujal

  36. I work at a pretty large web site and have a pretty good feeling that we’re not going to go full text in the near future because it’s disruptive to the business model (advertising) that our entire site is built on.

    When you’re a blogger like Scoble and are building your site out for professional reputation or even just passion, it’s easy to demand that everyone have full text feeds. When tens of thousands of dollars are in the balance daily for ad revenues alone, it makes things a little different.

    I know people are supposed to embrace the disruptive and popular technologies or else be called “dinosaurs” but when you’re in a conference room trying to sell the idea that, hey, let’s put our full stories in our RSS feeds, you get very concerned stares back at you asking very good, reasonable questions. These questions don’t fear the disruption… they’re asking how to handle it. At which point, I read Scoble and Gillmor and see that they’ve got nothing to contribute to that answer.

    I understand it’s what you want, but I look out at the marketplace and see that the most mainstream RSS aggregators, My Yahoo and Google IG, make the full text feed more or less useless. I have traffic numbers to show that the launch of My Yahoo, for example, is noticeable in our RSS traffic.

    Just a thought…. I’m generally with you on this, Robert, but contextual ads and those type of ads-in-RSS don’t really replace the revenue that might be lost from lost ad impressions. Second, the market so far is showing that full text feeds aren’t that important (see My Yahoo/Google IG).

    Sujal

  37. I work at a pretty large web site and have a pretty good feeling that we’re not going to go full text in the near future because it’s disruptive to the business model (advertising) that our entire site is built on.

    When you’re a blogger like Scoble and are building your site out for professional reputation or even just passion, it’s easy to demand that everyone have full text feeds. When tens of thousands of dollars are in the balance daily for ad revenues alone, it makes things a little different.

    I know people are supposed to embrace the disruptive and popular technologies or else be called “dinosaurs” but when you’re in a conference room trying to sell the idea that, hey, let’s put our full stories in our RSS feeds, you get very concerned stares back at you asking very good, reasonable questions. These questions don’t fear the disruption… they’re asking how to handle it. At which point, I read Scoble and Gillmor and see that they’ve got nothing to contribute to that answer.

    I understand it’s what you want, but I look out at the marketplace and see that the most mainstream RSS aggregators, My Yahoo and Google IG, make the full text feed more or less useless. I have traffic numbers to show that the launch of My Yahoo, for example, is noticeable in our RSS traffic.

    Just a thought…. I’m generally with you on this, Robert, but contextual ads and those type of ads-in-RSS don’t really replace the revenue that might be lost from lost ad impressions. Second, the market so far is showing that full text feeds aren’t that important (see My Yahoo/Google IG).

    Sujal

  38. I work at a pretty large web site and have a pretty good feeling that we’re not going to go full text in the near future because it’s disruptive to the business model (advertising) that our entire site is built on.

    When you’re a blogger like Scoble and are building your site out for professional reputation or even just passion, it’s easy to demand that everyone have full text feeds. When tens of thousands of dollars are in the balance daily for ad revenues alone, it makes things a little different.

    I know people are supposed to embrace the disruptive and popular technologies or else be called “dinosaurs” but when you’re in a conference room trying to sell the idea that, hey, let’s put our full stories in our RSS feeds, you get very concerned stares back at you asking very good, reasonable questions. These questions don’t fear the disruption… they’re asking how to handle it. At which point, I read Scoble and Gillmor and see that they’ve got nothing to contribute to that answer.

    I understand it’s what you want, but I look out at the marketplace and see that the most mainstream RSS aggregators, My Yahoo and Google IG, make the full text feed more or less useless. I have traffic numbers to show that the launch of My Yahoo, for example, is noticeable in our RSS traffic.

    Just a thought…. I’m generally with you on this, Robert, but contextual ads and those type of ads-in-RSS don’t really replace the revenue that might be lost from lost ad impressions. Second, the market so far is showing that full text feeds aren’t that important (see My Yahoo/Google IG).

    Sujal

Comments are closed.