Full Content RSS Feeds Compounding the Splog Problem? ���ׂẴR���e���c��RSS�t�B�[�h�z���̃X�v���O�̖��ł����H
It appears to me full content RSS feeds are actually helping and compounding the splog (spam blog) problem.���S�Ȃ悤�Ɍ����܂������C���R���e���c��RSS�t�B�[�h�́A���ۂɔz������菕���ƃX�v���O�i�X�p���u���O�j���ł��B Splogs or spam blogs are blogs which are created by using syndicated content of other blogs, automatically aggregated, to increase their PR and AdSense dollars.�u���O�́A�u���O��splogs����f���[�����g�p���č쐬���ꂽ�V���W�P�[�g�����̃u���O�̓��e���A�����I�ɏW��A�L���AdSense���グ��ɂ́A�h���ł��B Splogs don't add value to the system, rather devalue the whole blogging concept.��splogs�Ă��Ȃ��V�X�e���ɕt�����l���A�ނ���S�̂̕�����艺����Blogging�̊T�O�ł��B Splogs also make��splogs�� concepts like PubSub irrelevant PubSub�͊T�O�̂悤�ȕs�K�� .�ł��B
Proponents like�x���҂̂悤�� Dave Winer�f�C�u���C�i�[ and����� Scoble scoble prefers full content in RSS feeds.���S��RSS�t�B�[�h�̃R���e���c���D�ށB
The upside is that viewers do not have to click again to go to the website to view the full content.�����҂̏�l�͍Ăт͂���܂���ւ̍s������N���b�N���āA���ׂẴR���e���c�̃E�F�u�T�C�g���Q�Ƃ��Ă��������B They can view it directly in their RSS reader only.�ނ�ɒ��ڕ\�����邱�Ƃ��ł��܂�RSS���[�_�[�݂̂ł��B The downsides for the site author is that he doesn't have control over the layout of his content and also presents him with a challenge to monetize his offerings which he can do when the viewer comes to his page.�̃}�C�i�X���߁A�T�C�g�̒��҂́A�ނ𐧌䂷��K�v�͂���܂���ނ̃R���e���c�Ƃ̃��C�A�E�g���v���[���g�ނɂ��ނ̎�v���ɒ����ł��邱�Ƃ�ނ̓r���[�A�̂Ƃ��ɂȂ�Ɣނ̃y�[�W���������������B Feed advertising is an option.�t�B�[�h�L���f�ڂ́A�I�v�V������I�����܂��B However the success rate is not worth writing home about as far as I know.�������A�������͂��܂艿�l���Ȃ��������݃z�[���ɂ��Ă͎��̒m�����ł��B
The biggest downside IMHO is that such feeds makes it very easy to re-purpose them to create splogs which ultimately devalue the whole blogosphere. imho�̍ő�̎�_�́A���̂悤�ȃt�B�[�h�����邱�Ɣ��ɊȒP�ȖړI���č쐬���ău���O�E�S�̂�splogs���ŏI�I�ɉߏ��]������B
A RSS provider (any blogger for example) has no active control over the usage.��RSS�̃v���o�C�_�i�Ⴆ�A�C�ӂ�Blogger �j�̗��p��@�ɂ͐ϋɓI�ɐ��䂵�܂��B He can at most�ނ͂قƂ�ǂ� add copyright messages to the feed���쌠�̃��b�Z�[�W��lj�����t�B�[�h thereby alerting common public that his feed is being misused.���ʂ̍����͎����̃t�B�[�h���x�������p����Ă��܂��B
What are the solutions?�ǂ̂悤�ȃ\�����[�V�����ł����H
I suggested today����̎����� headline only RSS feeds RSS�t�B�[�h�̌��o���̂� which can satisfy both camps.���w�c����������Ƃ��ł���B
If you still prefer full content feeds you can use a facility such as provided by my�����܂����S�ȃR���e���c���D�ރt�B�[�h�Ȃǂ̎{�݂��g�p���邱�Ƃ��ł��܂������}�C feed copyrighter plugin for WordPress��������WordPress�̋���Copyrighter to automatically add copyright notice and illegal usage notification to the end of content along with option to inform the original author.���쌠�\���������I�ɒlj�����Ƃ̒ʒm����@�ȗ��p��@�̃R���e���c�̍Ō�̃I�v�V������m�点��ƂƂ��ɁA���̒��҂ł��B I plan to release a new version soon to make it harder for perpetrators to automatically delete such messages from the feed by simple filtering techniques.���̐V�����o�[�W�����������[�X����v��������ɂ��邱�Ƃ������邽�߁A���̂悤�ȃ��b�Z�[�W�������I�ɍ폜������Q�҂���̃t�B�[�h���ȒP�ȃt�B���^�����O�e�N�j�b�N�ł��B So far however no such attempts have been reported despite widespread usage.�������A����܂ł��̂悤�Ȏ��݂ɂ�������炸�A�L�͂ȗ��p��@������Ă��܂��B
Filed under��o����� CMS Software CMS�\�t�g�E�F�A , �A Headline News�j���[�X�̌��o�� , �A Pro Blogging�v��Blogging , �A Tech Note�Z�p�̃m�[�g , �A Web�E�F�u , �A Web Services Web�T�[�r�X , �A WordPress WordPress�� | |
| |
RSS 2.0 RSS 2.0�� | |
Trackback�g���b�N�o�b�N this Article |���̋L��|
Email this Article�d�q���[�����̋L��
You may also like to read��ǂނ悤�ɂ��邱�Ƃ��\ |





































November 20th, 2005 at 3:32 pm 2005�N11��20���3:32 pm��
I appreciate your work.���Ɋ��ӂ��Ă��������B But another option would simply be turning off RSS feeds.�������A�ʂ̃I�v�V�������I�t�ɂ�RSS�t�B�[�h�ɒP���ɂ��܂��B Control over content *must* remain with the author, else how can form be dictated and content monetized? *�R���e���c�𐧌䂷��K�v������܂��B *�܂܂́A����҂��A���̃t�H�[���ɂ͂ǂ�����Ύ�v����R���e���c�̎w���ł����H
(Side note: I�fm not sure when this idea that �gdisplay is up to the end user�h took hold, but I�fm certain that was the moment when content provision became a money-losing proposition. If you want my information, you can come to my site. Again, how can content be monetized in *any* other way?) �i�����F���̃A�C�f�A�悢�̂�������Ȃ��Ƃ��́A "�f�B�X�v���C�̂́A�G���h���[�U"���ێ����邪�A���͊m�M���ẮA�R���e���c�̒ɂȂ����u�ԍ̎Z�̂Ƃ�Ȃ���Ă��܂��B����ꍇ�́A���̏��ɂ��ẮA���������̃T�C�g�ɂ��邱�Ƃ��ł��܂��B�J��Ԃ��܂����A�R���e���c�̎�v���ɂ͂ǂ������* *���̕�@�ŔC�ӂ̂ł����H �j
If a writer^Wcontent provider remains convinced, for some reason, that RSS or Atom feeds remain a good idea, one option would be to enforce a click-through EULA before these feeds would be provided.���^ wcontent�v���o�C�_�̏ꍇ�A��Ղ��m�M�ɁA�������̗��R����A����RSS�܂���Atom�t�B�[�h�̂܂܂ł����A�C�f�A�́A 1�̃I�v�V�������N���b�N�X���[�G���h���[�U�[�g�p����������I�ɓK�p����O�ɂ����̃t�B�[�h������܂��B It would be well to keep in mind the risks that go with it: loss of control over content, and loss of control over layout.��ۂ��Ƃ��悭�s���č��܂郊�X�N�����邱�Ƃ�O���ɒu���Ă̂��ƁF�����𐧌䂷��R���e���c�A����у��C�A�E�g�̐���̑r�����܂��B Neither can be taken lightly!�ǂ�����y���ł��܂���I
Final note: It�fs striking to me how prophetic Ayn Rand was.�t�@�C�i�����F���̈�ۂ�\���G�C�������h�́A�ǂ̂悤�ł��B