---
title: Lack of Webfeed Hall of Shame
author: Tris
date: 2004-07-30
url: https://www.trishussey.com/lack-of-webfeed-hall-of-shame/
---

From Contentious this morning...I don&#39;t have any sites to add,
yet.  I think the Canadian government already has webfeeds (chalk
one up for Canada!).  These are the two of the three Amy lists
that I think are the biggest on the Hall of Shame.  Google, like
Amy says, owns Blogger!  And Darwin is a great magazine.  I
read their articles...but only when they are referenced in *someone else&#39;s webfeed*.  I just don&#39;t get around to going to the site and checking.  And I get enough e-mail now, thank you. [*Google News Alerts*](http://www.google.com/newsalerts?hl=en)*. Currently, Google offers a news alert service that provides a daily e-mail listing new stories appearing in *[*Google News*](http://news.google.com/" dragover="true)*
which correspond to terms (keywords) you search for. I love this
service and use it a lot &#226;&#8364;&#8220; but why, oh why, doesn&#39;t Google do this
via webfeed? A webfeed would tell me about new relevant stories AS SOON
AS THEY APPEAR, I wouldn&#39;t have to wait for a daily compilation e-mail.
**Google &#226;&#8364;&#8220; please, please tell me
you&#39;re working on this. I know that someone over there has heard of
this webfeed stuff, because there&#39;s a *[*Atom feed for Google&#39;s own blog*](http://www.google.com/googleblog/atom.xml)*. And these people bought *[*Blogger*](http://www.blogger.com/)*, for Pete&#39;s sake! Hello? Is anyone home over there?*[*Darwin Magazine*](http://darwinmag.com/)*.
This is the Web site of the magazine that bills itself as "information
technology for executives." And they don&#39;t manage to offer a single
webfeed? I know they know what RSS is &#226;&#8364;&#8220; *[*they&#39;ve covered it*](http://www.darwinmag.com/learn/curve/column.html?ArticleID=1014" dragover="true)*. It&#39;s sad when a technology magazine visibly lags behind the times in its own publishing strategy. ** *[*No Webfeed? No Excuse for These Sites!- Contentious Weblog*](http://blog.contentious.com/archives/000296.html)