Re: trends for 2004 - RSS?

From: Sean Brunnock <gmail_7519_at_server.com>
Date: Mon 12 Jan 2004 10:22:14 -0600

"Renyi Zsolt" <zsolt_at_kalandvilag.com> wrote:

>It's a very relevant
>alternative to newsletters with all that's going on around spam, but I don't
>see how it works for those content providers who attain ad revenue based on
>pageviews.

You don't have to put an entire newsletter into an RSS feed. RSS was
originally designed to propagate headlines with links back to the
article in question. That's what we do with our newsletter solution.

Our RSS feed is at http://server.com/WebApps/mail-list-archive.rss?list
and simply contains headlines and links back to copies of the
newsletters at http://server.com/WebApps/mail-list-archive.cgi?list .
Email subscribers get the entire newsletter.

Some publishers have been putting ads into the RSS feed itself, but
I don't think that's a very good idea. An RSS feed can be a very low
bandwidth means of advertising new content on your site. I don't see
a need to possiblly cause subscribers to drop your feed by
putting ads in your feed.

Sean Brunnock
http://server.com




Received on Mon Jan 12 2004 - 10:22:14 CST