Is it really worth all this? Dave Winer, the developer of RSS, is having it out with Jason Calacanis, the publisher of this blog network. We are among the first blog networks to serve ads in RSS feeds in any determined and organized fashion. That's because we believe in this medium and respect its content, not because we wish to corrupt the flow of information, as suggested by Dave Taylor. Dave Winer merely seems protective of his invention, offering no coherent reason that I can determine for preventing its monetization.

Is this really so difficult to get past? We (and other smart publishers mindful of their readers' variable tastes) will publish partial-post feeds without ads, and full-post feeds with Google-served relevant ads. It's a win-win-win (publisher-reader-advertiser) solution. Even the detractors can't argue with the partial-post, non-commercial solution. So where is the problem? How quickly we forget history. The Web was at first a commercial-free platform. Now that the Ny Times throws pop-ups in its readers' faces, there should be no talk of Weblogs Inc corrupting the flow of information by placing text ads in its feeds.

Every medium works out its commercial relationship with its customers. The marketplace will rule on this matter. If publishers are making a huge mistake by commercializing their RSS feeds, they will pay the price in lost business. But let's not suppose that this is a moral issue of any sort. RSS is a channel, pure and simple.