March 22, 2005
The real problem with RSS feeds
UPDATE (April 3, 2005): If you aren't already reading Stephan Spencer (and you should be), here's yet another reason to go and do it. His "RSS: Hot or Not for Marketers?" offers some incredibly thought provoking concepts for tracking RSS subscriptions and reader use. Well worth the read. And well worth subscribing to his RSS to see if he's tracking you.UPDATE (March 23, 2005): The Blog Herald covers a Slashdot survey on RSS use, which indicates the adoption of RSS is likely to increase "dramatically." This is an indirect contradiction of the Direct Marketing News' assertion that RSS adoption (for marketing purposes) will remain relatively flat for the next 2 years. Let's see, for new technology issues, whose opinion do I trust more? If the audience is going there, the marketers won't be far behind.
ORIGINAL POST
There is great deal of hubbub circulating in regards to an article in Direct Marketing News.
It seems everyone, including me, has an opinion on this one. And if you want to read others (who are likely to be far more eloquent than I), run, don't walk, over to Marketing Studies. They have a great collection of blogs covering the matter.
Oh. You're still here? Fine. I mean, great, I'm honored. So what's my take?
First, here's the gist of the article: RSS feeds and blogging will not be the road to easy riches for marketers looking to turn a quick buck.
To wit:
"RSS is not well suited to promotional-offer-oriented content because it does not offer the targeting and personalization capabilities of e-mail, the report said. However, even for use as a supplemental or alternative e-mail broadcast tool, the adoption of RSS for marketing purposes will remain low during the next 24 months."
Shocking. I mean incredibly revealing. People won't voluntarily consume spam and hype? Strange. Seriously.
That highlights the real problem for the direct marketing folks: RSS is pure content. There's no hiding behind cheese. There's no dazzling with useless tchotchkes. There's no way to blast it out to 100,000 people who really don't care to find the one that does. There's no accidentally opening the feed and accidentally continuing to read it, time and time again. There's only pure, unadulterated personality and content. And it's pretty stark. And that makes it difficult for the majority of marketing types. Really difficult.
In fact, I equate RSS to going back to the gray-background Web in 1996 or so. Or maybe even earlier Internet communications. It's telnet, truly.
But you want to know what? That's the beauty. For those who know how to use it effectively. And for everyone who wants to "improve it" or "add to it," I say this: Whoa, tiger. There is no need for it to evolve to the congested levels that the Web has. Why? Because the Web is already there. RSS was designed to simplify what was already there. To make it more digestible, more quickly, when the reader was ready to consume.
Making RSS more and more complex defeats the purpose. Making RSS more complex would be like AOL trying to run its own version of the "Web" on top of the actual Web without ever allowing people to leave the confines of AOL space. And how silly would that be? I mean, really.
And besides, the acronym can't be RSS if it's complex, can it?
Here's the other thing. I know this may come as a shock to you, but deep breath: Everything doesn't have to generate revenue.
I'm all over the place. Do I have a point? I do. You see, kids, here's the deal: RSS could, potentially, be the most effective branding vehicle ever created.
I see you screwing up your face. Knock it off. I'm serious.
But there are no images, you say. There's no pithy tagline. No logos. No content besides, well, content. I can hear you whining from here.
That's why it's so effective for communicating brand. It's pure content and personality. That's why it's more effective than noisy attempts at branding. Because it lacks any formal construct. Because it lacks the places to hide. And because, if you don't do it right, people are going to tune out.
But if you do it right, and your target market appreciates it, it can be more powerful than any "branding campaign" you've ever tried.
You see, the real problem with RSS is not that it's not an effective marketing vehicle. It's not that it's not capable of generating revenue. The real problem is that people are trying to use it the same way they've used every communication vehicle ever created. Or they're trying to use it as the whole, and not a part. Or they just aren't thinking. Wait a second. Actually, that's the main reason.
And the problem with RSS is that it isn't different. It's a hybrid of press release and journalism. Of talking and printing. Of columnist and conversation. Letters to the Editor in real time. And all of you know how I feel about hybrids.
So here's the meat of the post: Long story short, like brand, the real impact of RSS occurs somewhere, out there, beyond our control. With the reader. The reader has to make the choice to subscribe. The reader has to make the choice to read. And the reader has to make the choice to return. And if the content isn't there, nothing is going to save that.
The emperor has no clothes. That's the real problem with RSS.
You scoff. But think about it. Besides, if you think this view of RSS is a stretch, you should read my other RSS-themed post, An Immodest Proposal: Where blogging and RSS are headed (or everything old is new again) .
In any case, I'd love to hear your thoughts on the matter. Please feel free to comment. Or just revel in your anonymity. But please return.
The real problem with RSS feeds
| | Subscribe:
RSS, Bloglines
