It isn't a religious thing - the vast majority of the time, the truncation is way too short to properly advertise the content. The mystery doesn't move me to click-through, quite the opposite - it is annoying, so I remove the annoyance.
I understand the tradeoffs for folks who want to be paid via ads, but the utility just isn't there for me - I do not lack for reading options, and if something is really good, it'll find me some other way.
I guess they just follow the URL, extract the body text the same way that sites like Instapaper do it, and give that back.
Probably more RSS readers can do the same.
An older version available on BitBucket: https://bitbucket.org/fivefilters/full-text-rss/src/master/
EDIT: full-text-rss + newsboat + nyt screenshot: https://lsngl.us/@alrs/105652475456016345
One thing I don't like about the whole article RSS is that I get requests to narrate my whole website or blog experience, in addition to the normal writing about stuff.
In effect the full-article RSS audience has its own experiential needs, which include "tell me about what you added to the non-blog sections, tell me about the new tools in the sidebar, or the new article footer format, or even hey I never heard about the new design," and so on. Sometimes I also alter the CSS for a single post, when it makes sense.
Some of this narration is just expected if your main format is traditional, plain blog. But personally my blogs tend to evolve and incorporate other stuff. And for sites with even more of an experiential aspect than my own, I can see why RSS could drive the publishers a bit mad, increased exposure or no.
Because of this experience, personally I would rather try reading via a page-download tool or format, even automated w3m or something, and see if that's an improvement. You'd get the full article in plain text, but you'd also get some of the other stuff around the site, including links which you may even be able to mark for later download.
I understand my using the sites that way contributes nothing really to their bottom line, I never saw any ads, but that of course was half the appeal. The early days of "web2.0" people often just naively dumped everything in the RSS feed.
It uses all sorts of manipulations to auto play video ads, pop ups, picture unders, user tracking, page interaction telemetry, etc.
All kinds of nonsense to display an article to you, which if it really is important, then another writer would have also written about it.
Some websites I just avoid completely, when I see the url.
These websites should just go with a pay-to-read subscription model instead. If their junk is interesting enough, then they’ll find enough people willing to pay a few cents to read it.
For whatever it's worth, I do click-through RSS feeds on my blogs just because I was too lazy to set up full text feeds and figure out how stuff like video would work and whether or not it would be a better end-user experience to alter the content in some way on style-heavy pages. Right now I'm constructing the feed myself. But if someone ever wanted to use a tool like you're describing on my blogs, I would have no objection. Don't feel guilty about scraping a site I build or building tools to do so, if anything it would make me feel less guilty about never getting around to setting up full-text RSS feeds. :)
I don't run ads or analytics anyway, but even if I did, as far as I'm concerned anyone who has the right to visit a page also has the right to download it, and to use automated tools to download it on their behalf[0].
I don't see any moral difference between using an adblocker and scraping a web page. Both are hitting the same endpoints and selectively displaying content that the user wants to see.
I honestly would not mind much if sites just included ads in their .RSS feed? Some bloggers I follow have their rss 'sponsored' and will do a sponsor post once a week. If ad insertion is really so important a site could just have labeled ads as part of the content stream. It's not ideal, but I'd prefer it to a feed that only has 2 or 3 teaser sentences and then forces me to click through.
I actually took Wired and Slate off my RSS feed just because I got annoyed at how often I would click through and get a paywall. Usually I was using up my free articles just to see what the article was about without reading it.
Basically, for feeds where I have "full text" enabled, it fetches the article page with mozilla's "reader mode" implementation and extracts the full text.
It isn't really usable with aggregators such as planet kde/gnome, though.
I'm maintaining the TT-RSS plugin feediron https://github.com/feediron/ttrss_plugin-feediron that fetches full-text data, so my thinking is this:
At the end of the day if it's a openly available website and you are personally (through your own server) fetching the resources I don't think anyone has a right to complain.
Now if you were offering it as a service it might arguably be a bit more grey, but only if you're ignoring the robots.txt file
The RSS aggregators should encourage readers to go to the original website. So when I got the chance to build my own RSS reader(https://feeds.pub) I only shows a title and link of an article to readers to drive them to the original website.
However I find news sites are the most common offenders of the truncating which I guess I can understand.
I am not sure if there are many doing something similar to mine. My pattern is to Open all my interested Links in New Tabs. That is why I thought RSS Reader should always be within a Browser or as Web Services like Feedly.
I do offline Reading for long articles only. And Saved via Reading List on Safari that does automatic downloading. But it is quite problematic for me because most of the time I need to look up something related while I am reading on things that I dont understand or assumed wrongly. And this is still best done on a PC with Browser.
So I now only listen to Music, Reading Novel or WebComic / Manga for offline.
Traffic to both the feed and to the main site increased noticeably when I reduced it to a descriptor.
This is unacceptable to me, and if a site does this I unsubscribe immediately.
Great tool you have! I was considering building something like this (but directly in a feed reader), by any chance do you intend to release the source for it so that people can run it themselves?
Another reason, which I think is fair, is that with full articles in the RSS feed, the feed can quickly become a fairly large chunk of data.
I haven't found a good solution, but I just suck it up and serve the full text anyways
It seems to me like there needs to be a standard pingback endpoint (either in /.well-known or, better, right in the podcast/rss XML) that your client pings when it seems like you've consumed the content (scrolled through most of a web page, listened to 80+% of a podcast), but only if you've opted in to that.
So I wrote a little web service accepts an RSS feed, and then crawls each link in it, parses the HTML to extract the text using one of those text extraction libraries, and then "republishes" a new version of the feed (with the full article) which I then subscribe to in my RSS reader so I can read the articles offline, e.g.
example.com/rss?feed=foo.net/artcles/rss
I've never open sourced it though because I guess it's a bit of a grey area - the sites want you to go to the full URL so they can show you ads etc