> I think there's an inherent conflict with RSS and content providers today. Think about it, an RSS feed allows you to get content without dealing with advertising, tracking, etc.
How so? I think RSS increases advertising and tracking in actual usage of rss readers. When I want to read the article I actually have to open the webpage. The RSS feed normally gives you a headline and if your lucky the first paragraph. So I am going directly to the source when I use RSS. When I use Google News or Facebook I am going to a lot fewer websites.
Because I think the sites would rather you rack up page views browsing for the content you want to read as well. They'd rather you scroll through their index page than one curated and cleaned of ads/trackers. I do agree that the actual content parsers like FB and Google are even more contrarian to what these sites want.
How so? I think RSS increases advertising and tracking in actual usage of rss readers. When I want to read the article I actually have to open the webpage. The RSS feed normally gives you a headline and if your lucky the first paragraph. So I am going directly to the source when I use RSS. When I use Google News or Facebook I am going to a lot fewer websites.