Authors Step 1: Read TOS * | Step 2: SignUp Free | Step 3: Read Submit Guidelines * | Step 4: Submit Articles

Are Partial Feeds Worth It?

By: Danny Wirken -

True to its nature, the blogosphere never runs out of interesting debates. One such debate raging on is over partial feeds. There are differing views on whether feeds should contain excerpts of an article referred to as partial feeds only. Are partial feeds worth using?

RSS Feeds – A Brief Background

Gone are the days when your web ritual includes logging on the URLs of the sites you visit everyday to catch up on the latest news or happenings. Some of these sites are on news, information technology, fashion, company news, or other special interests sites. On busy days, you do not get to visit these sites thus missing out on reading some important articles. If time permits, you have to go to each of these sites and look for updates. It is totally time-consuming. What is even worse is if you have to browse through twenty or more sites. There has to be a better way. Here comes RSS to the rescue.

RSS also known as Rich Site Summary or Really Simple Syndication provides blog publishers a channel to give concise summaries of entries to potential readers. Blogs publish content summaries in RSS feeds. RSS is a new method to broadcast not only news but structured information as well. It is a quick communication channel. The RSS contents are published as feeds that contain short descriptions of all the recent articles posted on a particular blog. These feeds keep readers abreast of news and information. RSS is written in the XML format thus the orange icons with XML or RSS labels.

RSS allows blog publishers to provide fresh information on their blog which, in turn, encourage readers to return. Fresh content also means that search engine spiders will crawl the site more frequently. Readers benefit from RSS because they can easily scan headlines or titles and read articles of interest. Because the fresh information is summarized and provided in one single location, readers can usually read more articles in a short span of time. The real catch is that readers get to choose the feeds they wish to read. In short, RSS allows readers to locate information easily. They can also read condensed information clearly marked and dated. Readers can maximize their time without having to worry about spam.

RSS starts with an original blog that has content or post available. The blog creates an RSS feed, sometimes also called a channel, that is available just like any file on the web server. The blog registers this feed in the form of an RSS document with a directory of RSS publishers. Once an RSS feed is available on the web, any computer can retrieve it. The RSS feeds are then read using a program referred to as an RSS feed reader. The feed reader regularly checks to see if the RSS feed has been updated. As the feed is updated, new content will appear automatically. The feed reader allows readers to gather information from diverse sources of their own choice with a single, automated program that checks RSS feeds periodically and highlights fresh content.

An RSS feed reader allows you to look at the RSS feeds from your subscribed sources. Each source will list the items. Each item includes the title, description and the blog address for the full content of the article.

Full Feeds vs. Partial Feeds – The Verdict

The full feeds and partial feeds issue is whether, as a blogger, you should provide the full content of your post in the RSS feed or only part of the content. In a full feed, you can read the whole article in your RSS feed reader thus there is no need to visit the originating blog to view the full article. This means that the entire article is available in the feed reader and you do not have to go back to the source to get the whole content. A full feed gets you the entire text of a post in your RSS reader.

In a partial feed, you get a brief summary of the blog post and if you want to read the full article you have to click through the originating blog. A partial feed typically includes the headline of the content, a short summary and a link back to the blog where the content comes from. A blogger who publishes partial feeds uses interesting headlines and intriguing descriptions of the full content to encourage readers to visit his blog and read the entire article. A partial feed delivers just the headline and an excerpt of the article.

Bloggers are at odds on whether it is better to have full or partial feeds on their blogs. Some quarters favor full feeds while others feel that partial feeds are worth it. Both sides have presented valid arguments.

According to bloggers who support full feeds, the main advantage of publishing full feeds is that it is more convenient for readers. There is no need for readers to leave their feed readers to read the rest of the article. Readers do not want the added work of having to visit the site where the post resides. They do not want any interruption. If a reader’s main way of reading blogs is through an RSS reader, it would really hinder workflow if he has to visit the blog itself to get the rest of the article. If a blogger wants to engage readers, he needs to do it in their own terms by giving them the full text in a feed. Full feeds provide a better user experience and give readers the freedom to visit the blogs at their own leisure.

Full feeds make it easier for readers to access content. Some bloggers even disclosed that full feeds actually drive more traffic to a blog. This is maybe because full feeds improve user experience, enough to get readers interested. Another thing, if a blog with a feed is only publishing partial text then that is all the search engine like Feedster can index. Right now, access to the widest possible audience is available through full text feed syndication. If a blogger makes money indirectly from a blog, full feeds are better because he wants as many readers to view his content to help build blog profile.

Bloggers who favor partial feeds reason that readers like to go over headlines of their feeds looking for articles of interest and displaying the partial content gives them an idea of what the article is all about. For these readers, displaying the full text for every article gets in the way since they do not want to see the full content until they have decided when an article is interesting to them. Full feeds can be quite overwhelming. Readers want short summaries, not full text so they can scan easily and take in only the content they want to read. Publishing a summary encourages readers to visit the blog where the entire article resides, therefore, bloggers gain advertising revenue. Partial feeds help the bottom line. They lessen the possibility for unscrupulous web developers to steal content which can pose a big problem for full feeds.

When simplified, the full feeds and partial feeds debate boils down to revenue and control. One of the concerns of bloggers if they opt for full feeds is their advertisements will not be read if readers are bypassing their ad-laden blog for the text only feed. For full feeds advocate, they reason that readers definitely want to have the upper hand – consume content on their terms.

In the end, a blogger should have to decide whether or not partial feeds are worth it – more relevant to his audience. If he goes for partial feeds, he has the added responsibility to make sure that the partial feeds contain ample information so readers can decide if visiting the blog site will be worth his time.

Article Source: http://articleblender.com

www.theinternetone.net

Please Rate this Article

Not yet Rated