The point is that curation of an RSS reader forces one to think about their inputs, and to exercise their values in doing so. Just as with any hobby, the effort adds meaning to the output. It’s like in WALL-E, where we turn into morbidly obese people on hoverchairs being shuttled between stimuli. The common denominator is the move from more effort to less.

I’m sure social media sites had an effect too, because-like aggregators-they were singular watering holes that guaranteed something exciting when you showed up. They want you to see the original website so they can show you ads the way they want you to see them.

With RSS you get the content itself, which your reader can choose to display in different ways. The less effort it takes to acquire something, the less value it will have to you.īut perhaps most devastating was the web’s move to an advertising model, which RSS runs directly counter to. And second, it removed the need to tend to one’s own input garden. First, they broke the direct connection between the reader and the creator, making it so that Digg showed you a story, not Kristen-who you’ve been following for years. But I think they stole something from us. I’ve been blogging since 1999 and on Reddit since 2005, and I’ve actually never stopped using RSS either. A picture of me getting a story off of Digg in 2005

Cnn rss feed