hello there! if you're new here and like what you read, you may want to grab the rss feed so you can always be up to date. thanks for visiting!

i have to admit, i have been a long time proponent of using full feeds, but for some reason, in spite of everyone arguing in favor of full feeds, some people just don’t listen. the latest of these ‘some people’ is the nytimes which recently acquired the freakonomics blog.

While there were a few congratulations thrown in, the vast majority of the comments on the blog when the news broke was to complain about the NY Times’ decision to switch the RSS feed from full text to partial text, where anyone who wanted to read the whole thing would have to click through.

knowing dubner and levitt, i wouldn’t be surprised if they got freakonomicsy with it and wrote a post on why full feeds don’t result in fewer page views. for now, mike has some great points on why full feeds can work wonders for you.

Full text feeds makes the reading process much easier. It means it’s that much more likely that someone reads the full piece and actually understands what’s being said — which makes it much, much, much more likely that they’ll then forward it on to someone else, or blog about it themselves, or post it to Digg or Reddit or Slashdot or Fark or any other such thing — and that generates more traffic and interest and page views from new readers, who we hope subscribe to the RSS feed and become regular readers as well.