In Praise of RSS and Controlled Feeds of Information

In Praise of RSS and Controlled Feeds of Information 🔗 **Source:** [In Praise of RSS and Controlled Feeds of Information](https://blog.burkert.me/posts/in_praise_of_syndication/) > [!note]+ Document Notes > tags: [RSS, Open Standards, Media Diet] > author: [Tom Burkert] > source: [blog.burkert.me] > reference: [https://blog.burkert.me/posts/in_praise_of_syndication/] > date created: 2025-10-24 00:00 > > # 🏷️ Title: In Praise of RSS and Controlled Feeds of Information >  ## 🧭 Table of Contents - [📝 Summary](#-summary) - [📖 Main Content](#-main-content) - [🗒️ Notes](#️-notes) - [📚 References](#-references) - [🗣️ Paraphrase](#️-paraphrase) - [📰 Newsletter](#-newsletter) - [✅ Action Items](#-action-items) - [🧪 Hypotheses](#-hypotheses) - [📊 Methodology](#-methodology) - [❓ Questions](#-questions) - [🔮 Future Research](#-future-research) - [💡 Implications](#-implications) - [🧠 Learning Styles Assessment](#-learning-styles-assessment) - [📊 Accessibility Assessment](#-accessibility-assessment) - [🌍 DEIB Assessment](#-deib-assessment) - [✅ Logical Validity](#-logical-validity) - [🛡️ DARVO Analysis](#-darvo-analysis) - [🎯 Conclusion](#-conclusion) ### 🔗 References - Include links cited in or relevant to the article. ## 📝 Summary - What happened: The author argues black-box, engagement-optimized feeds degrade our “media diets,” and proposes RSS—simple, reverse-chronological, user-controlled feeds—as the antidote. - Why it matters: Restores control, reduces distraction, and improves information quality and autonomy. - Key stakeholders: Readers, publishers/bloggers, researchers, podcasters, tool makers. - Risks and tradeoffs: Less “discovery,” no built-in comments, occasional teaser-only feeds, setup friction. - Bottom line: Use RSS to reclaim attention and curate a balanced, portable, algorithm-free information flow. ## 📖 Main Content - Core arguments: Algorithmic feeds optimize for ads and engagement, not user well-being. RSS is a simple standard supported by most sites and all podcasts, giving reverse-chronological control and consistent, distraction-free reading. - Context/definitions: RSS (Really Simple Syndication) is a standardized XML format for site updates consumed in readers/aggregators. - Noted uncertainties: Some sites ship partial feeds; paywall quirks vary; app preference is personal. ### 🗒️ Notes - “Walled-garden platforms and black-box feed algorithms” make media diets “miserable.” - RSS offers reverse-chronological, user-chosen feeds; widely supported by CMSs and the entire podcast ecosystem. - Personal journey: From Google Reader to FreshRSS + FeedMe; folders by mood/topic (e.g., Fun, Reads, AI papers). - Benefits: Consistent UI, fewer distractions, reduced comment-section rabbit holes, offline reading. - Tips: Start with The Old Reader or Feedly; export/import via OPML; categorize feeds early; periodic pruning; use Muspy for artist releases; leverage arXiv API queries for niche topics. ## 📚 References - Molly White — Curate your own newspaper with RSS: https://www.mollywhite.net/blog/rss/ - FreshRSS: https://freshrss.org - The Old Reader: https://theoldreader.com - Feedly: https://feedly.com - Muspy (music release alerts with RSS): https://muspy.com - arXiv API documentation: https://info.arxiv.org/help/api/ - Example arXiv query (LLM + multilingual): https://export.arxiv.org/api/query?search_query=abs:LLM+AND+multilingual&sortBy=submittedDate&sortOrder=descending - xkcd: https://xkcd.com - The Oatmeal: https://theoatmeal.com - The Marginalian: https://www.themarginalian.org - Sentiers: https://sentiers.media ## 🗣️ Paraphrase - Paragraph A: Algorithmic feeds prioritize engagement and ads, not user interests, degrading information quality. - Paragraph B: RSS is a simple, open standard that restores control through reverse-chronological, user-selected feeds. ## 📰 Newsletter Take back your media diet with RSS. Instead of black-box feeds, subscribe directly to sites and creators you trust. Starter picks: Feedly or The Old Reader, then graduate to FreshRSS when you want ownership. Pro tip: organize by mood (Fun, Deep Reads, Research). For devs and WordPress folks, publish full-text feeds, offer per-category/tag feeds, and document your feed URLs. Handy links: Molly White’s guide, FreshRSS, and arXiv’s API for topic-specific research feeds. ## ✅ Action Items #### DevRel - Publish official RSS endpoints; add per-topic feeds. - Create “Add to RSS” buttons and OPML starter packs. - Tutorials: “From social feeds to RSS” and “Offline reading setups.” #### OSPO - Document feed licensing and attribution norms. - Provide guidance on feed reuse and archiving for research. #### Community - Share OPML bundles; host “RSS 101” onboarding sessions. - Promote creator-to-creator blogrolls to seed discovery. #### WordPress - Ensure full-text feeds; expose per-category/tag feeds. - Add feed links to theme headers; test with popular readers. - Provide OPML exports; write HelpHub docs for RSS best practices. #### The WPOCC - Fund open-source readers/aggregators usability improvements. - Offer microgrants for feed quality (full text, summaries, tags). ### FAIR - Encourage signed feeds and provenance notes. - Publish governance for feed changes and deprecations. ## 🧪 Hypotheses - Users switching to RSS report reduced time-on-feed and higher satisfaction. - Full-text feeds increase completion rates and retention. - Per-topic/tag feeds reduce unsubscribe rates versus single global feeds. - Offline-capable readers increase reading during travel/downtime. ### 📊 Methodology - A/B test full vs partial feeds; measure completion and retention. - Survey pre/post RSS adoption on time spent and perceived quality. - Log topic-feed subscriptions vs global-feed churn. - Instrument offline reading sessions and article completion. ### ❓ Questions - Which UX patterns best support sustainable RSS habits? - How do discovery mechanisms (blogrolls, OPML bundles) compare to algorithms? - What standards help verify feed authenticity and integrity? ### 🔮 Future Research - Signed feeds and anti-spam heuristics. - Ethical discovery without engagement bait. - Accessibility-first feed templates. ### 💡 Implications - Practice: Offer granular feeds and full text. - Policy: Transparent feed changes; clear licensing. - Education: Teach RSS in digital literacy curricula. - Funding: Support open-source readers and hosting. ### 🧠 Learning Styles Assessment - Reading level: Flesch-Kincaid Grade ≈ 9–10. #### 👀 Visual learners - Present: Clear structure; consistent UI in readers. - Improve: Add diagrams of RSS flow and foldering. #### 🔊 Aural learners - Present: Podcast analogy. - Improve: 3-minute audio summary. #### 🗣️ Verbal learners - Present: Definitions and examples. - Improve: Glossary of RSS terms. #### 🧩 Kinesthetic learners - Present: Step-by-step tips. - Improve: Checklist and OPML starter. #### 🧠 Logical learners - Present: Causal critique of algorithms. - Improve: Decision tree for tool selection. #### 🧑‍🤝‍🧑 Social learners - Present: Blogrolls and recommendations. - Improve: Cohort-based RSS onboarding. #### 🧘‍♀️ Solitary learners - Present: Self-paced setup. - Improve: Reflection prompts on media diet. #### 🌿 Naturalistic learners - Present: “Diet” metaphor. - Improve: Sustainability angle (energy/attention). ### 📊 Accessibility Assessment #### Screen reader semantics - Present: Headings and structure. - Improve: Ensure alt text in feed content. #### Keyboard navigation - Present: Most readers support it. - Improve: Avoid focus traps; visible focus states. #### Contrast and readability - Present: Reader-controlled fonts/themes. - Improve: Enforce minimum contrast in theme presets. #### Text resizing and reflow - Present: Responsive readers. - Improve: Prefer reduced motion options. #### Media and captions - Present: Text-first content. - Improve: Link to transcripts for embedded media. #### Forms and interactions - Present: Minimal. - Improve: Clear labels for feed add/search. #### Standards reference - Map to WCAG 2.2 AA across reader UI. ### 🌍 DEIB Assessment #### Cultural breadth - Present: Global-friendly open standards. - Improve: Multilingual feeds and discovery. #### Inclusive language - Present: Neutral tone. - Improve: Plain-language quickstart. #### Neurodiversity support - Present: Reduced distraction. - Improve: Highly configurable layouts and density. #### Representation - Present: Diverse source curation possible. - Improve: Highlight underrepresented creators’ feeds. #### Psychological safety - Present: Fewer toxic comment loops. - Improve: Opt-in comment viewing with warnings. ### ✅ Logical Validity #### Strong reasoning - Causal: Ad-driven incentives → engagement optimization → poor info quality; aligns with platform economics. - Analogical: “Media diet” frames balance and control. #### Fallacies - Potential overgeneralization about all algorithmic feeds; could be tempered by noting exceptions or hybrid models. #### Tone of voice - Personal, pragmatic, mildly critical of platforms; solution-oriented toward RSS. ### 🛡️ DARVO Analysis - Deny: No denial tactics. - Attack: Critiques systems, not individuals. - Reverse victim/offender: Not present; emphasizes user agency. ## 🎯 Conclusion - Bottom line: RSS restores control, clarity, and calm by replacing algorithmic manipulation with open, reverse-chronological feeds. - Next steps: Pick a reader (Feedly/The Old Reader), subscribe to trusted sources, organize by folders, export OPML for portability, and prune regularly. ## 🧱 Refactor Appendix (append after 🎯 Conclusion) ### 📚 Literature Split Pad - Purpose: Stage Konik CEE units that become per-source Literature notes. - Split level: H3. - Include verbatim quotes under 25 words and a [view highlight] link. ### [H1] RSS restores user control over feeds > [!quote] [In Praise of RSS and Controlled Feeds of Information](https://blog.burkert.me/posts/in_praise_of_syndication/) by [[Tom Burkert]] via [[blog.burkert.me]]. Published 2025-09-26. Accessed 2025-10-24. > “You’re in full control of what you’re receiving, and the feeds are purely reverse chronological bliss.” User autonomy and attention hygiene. [view highlight](https://blog.burkert.me/posts/in_praise_of_syndication/#H1) #xref #articleseed ID:rw_[MISSING] ### [H2] Algorithmic feeds optimize for engagement, not users > [!quote] [In Praise of RSS and Controlled Feeds of Information](https://blog.burkert.me/posts/in_praise_of_syndication/) > “The goal of social media is to keep you glued to the feed for as long as possible.” Design implication: engagement vs. well-being. [view highlight](https://blog.burkert.me/posts/in_praise_of_syndication/#H2) #xref ID:rw_[MISSING] --- ### 🔖 Atomic Split Pad (Zettel Candidates) - Purpose: Promote reusable claims into Atomic notes. - Split level: H4. - Each item: one idea, present tense, specific, testable. #### [Z1] Full-text feeds increase completion rates - Compare full vs partial feeds in readers. - Links: [[RSS]] [[Reader-UX]] #### [Z2] Foldered feeds improve reading focus - Mood/topic folders reduce context switching. - Links: [[Attention-Design]] [[Information-Diet]] --- ### ✏️ Fleeting Queue (Extract by Selection) - Purpose: Capture quick actions or sparks for Fleeting notes. - Extraction: Select one line → “Refactor: Extract selection to new note (content only).” - [F1] Export current subscriptions to OPML and back up — context/https://blog.burkert.me/posts/in_praise_of_syndication/ #fleeting #inbox - [F2] Trial FreshRSS + mobile client comparison — context/https://blog.burkert.me/posts/in_praise_of_syndication/ #fleeting #inbox - [F3] Build per-tag feeds on my WordPress site — context/https://blog.burkert.me/posts/in_praise_of_syndication/ #fleeting #inbox ---