It has recently come to our attention that roughly 90% of the people who read this blog via RSS feed had their subscriptions interrupted when we moved our blog to NYTimes.com about 10 days ago. (If you don’t read this blog via feed, you probably have no idea what I am talking about, and nothing in this post will matter to you.) There are four things to say about this:
1. The problem is now fixed.
2. Sorry.
3. Welcome back.
4. The feed currently being sent out by the Times is not the full feed; instead you will be receiving an excerpt of each post, requiring you to click through to the Times site to read the whole blog.
There are a few more things to say about No. 4:
1. If things are now working properly, your reader has just been stuffed full of about 10 days’ worth of blogging that ran the gamut from terrorism to the science of insulting women to Presidential power.
2. If you are anything like the 10% of our feed readers whose subscriptions did get properly redirected last week, you will probably be unhappy about losing the full feed.
3. The partial feed that the Times been offering since the move was apparently pretty terrible — too short and not very informative — but has apparently just been made somewhat less terrible, though how much less I don’t yet know.
4. By Monday, we hope to have final word on the Times‘s position on whether to restore a full feed, and I’ll write a more thorough update then. In the meantime, feel free to express yourself in the comments section below, but know that it will be hard to come up with a new way of saying “This feed sucks,” which has been the gist of approximately 80% of the e-mails we’ve gotten in the past week.
5. Thanks for reading, and have a good weekend.
and 
. You can also watch it on 
Absolutely ridiculous that it isn’t a full feed. E.g. this posting says:
It has recently come to our attention that roughly 90% of the people who read this blog via RSS feed had their subscriptions interrupted when we moved our blog to NYTimes.com about 10 days ago. (If you don’t read this blog via feed, you probably have no idea what I am talking about, and nothing [...]
That’s it? It should be a full feed, like before. Terrible move Freakonomics, absolutely terrible. (Not to mention, it was to the New York Times, ugh!)
Absolutely ridiculous that it isn’t a full feed. E.g. this posting says:
It has recently come to our attention that roughly 90% of the people who read this blog via RSS feed had their subscriptions interrupted when we moved our blog to NYTimes.com about 10 days ago. (If you don’t read this blog via feed, you probably have no idea what I am talking about, and nothing [...]
That’s it? It should be a full feed, like before. Terrible move Freakonomics, absolutely terrible. (Not to mention, it was to the New York Times, ugh!)
After reading your post here about RSS feeds, I want to note that I like cats.
After reading your post here about RSS feeds, I want to note that I like cats.
I too think partial feeds are outrageous. Why even bother at all!
Please, please, please restore the full feed. This is a problem that almost all corporate news agencies have. Please catch up with technology and have an adaptable business plan.
I would not object to ads in the feed at all, if that is the issue.
I too think partial feeds are outrageous. Why even bother at all!
Please, please, please restore the full feed. This is a problem that almost all corporate news agencies have. Please catch up with technology and have an adaptable business plan.
I would not object to ads in the feed at all, if that is the issue.
Please, please restore the full feeds. Yes, the original “teasers” (I use the term loosely) were pathetic. Excerpts are better, but still unacceptable. I’m reading far fewer of your posts. Ditto for other NYT blogs. Great content, but too hard to incorporate into an already overloaded blog schedule.
Why is the whole access to content issue such a difficult one for the NYT to learn? I would hope they’d lead the way in transforming the model, rather than lagging the way they are.
Please, please restore the full feeds. Yes, the original “teasers” (I use the term loosely) were pathetic. Excerpts are better, but still unacceptable. I’m reading far fewer of your posts. Ditto for other NYT blogs. Great content, but too hard to incorporate into an already overloaded blog schedule.
Why is the whole access to content issue such a difficult one for the NYT to learn? I would hope they’d lead the way in transforming the model, rather than lagging the way they are.