RSS's identity crisis

Since I was on vacation last week, I missed the opportunity to weigh in on the Microsoft web feed controversy (although all I would've done was point out that they didn't coin the term and it's always been controversial). However, whatever you think of the name "web feed" -- I find it really clunky -- a new Nielsen/NetRatings survey indicates that the folks in Redmond are probably right in thinking that RSS needs a name that's easier to understand:

Nielsen/NetRatings polled 1,000 members of its research panel who read blogs. It found that nearly two-thirds of the respondents either never heard of RSS (Really Simple Syndication) or did not know what the technology is used for. The study found only 11% of Web log readers use RSS to monitor blogs.

Bill Burnham cites an even more compelling anecdotal example of the problem:

Fact is, if you wander just a little bit outside of Geek-centric world of tech-related and VC-related blogs what you quickly discover is that RSS feeds are few and far between. Take political blogs for example. A couple of weeks ago I noticed that one of the political blogs I enjoy, which also happens to be in the top half of the Top 500 feeds, didn't appear to have an RSS feed. I contacted the author and asked him if he had an RSS feed and he asked me "What's an RSS feed?" ... Now remember, this guy is a professional blogger doing numerous posts a day and trying to earn a living off of his blog (and judging by his ranking on the Top 500, doing a better job of that than most), but RSS wasn't even on his radar and even after having the supposed benefits described to him, he hasn't been motivated enough to do much more than the bare minimum.

Here's another way to look at it: an acronym whose meaning changes with each version is almost by definition too complicated to explain easily.