Is RSS Still Used? Yes — Here Is How
RSS never went away: every newsroom still publishes one and podcasts run on it. What an RSS feed is, why it lost the mainstream, and when it beats a feed.
Published · Updated
RSS never went away. Practically every newsroom still publishes at least one feed, the entire podcast industry is distributed over the format, and a great many apps that never say the word are reading RSS underneath — so the short answer to is RSS still used is yes, at scale, and mostly invisibly. What collapsed in 2013 was the consumer product category, not the plumbing. This article covers what a feed is, why the audience left, and when a ranking beats a raw chronological list. It does not compare individual feed readers.
Is RSS still used in 2026?
Yes. RSS is the default syndication layer of the open web: newsrooms publish feeds because they want to be read elsewhere, podcast apps have no other distribution mechanism, and news aggregators of every size read those files rather than negotiating with each publisher.
The reason it feels dead is that its most visible consumer product died. Google announced on 13 March 2013 that it would retire Google Reader on 1 July that year, noting that usage had declined since the product launched in 2005. Reader was where the mainstream met RSS. When it closed, the audience dispersed into social feeds and the format receded into infrastructure, where it has stayed.
What is an RSS feed, technically?
An RSS feed is an XML file a website publishes at a fixed address, listing what it has recently posted: headline, summary, link, timestamp, often an image. Any program that can fetch a URL can read it, with no login, no API key and no permission from the publisher.
The format has a documented history rather than a vague age. RSS 0.91 dates from June 2000 and RSS 0.92 from December 2000; UserLand Software published RSS 2.0 on 19 August 2002, and the current specification, version 2.0.11, was issued by the RSS Advisory Board on 30 March 2009. It has needed no revision since, which is unusual and is part of the point.
Three consequences follow, and together they are why the format refuses to die.
It is pull, not push. Nothing arrives unless you ask for it. There is no engagement team on the other end deciding when you should be interrupted.
It is chronological by default. The file lists what was published, in the order it was published. Any reordering is done by the reader you chose, not by the publisher and not by a platform.
It is portable. Your subscriptions are a list of URLs. Export them, import them elsewhere, and you have moved. Nobody can hold your reading list hostage, because it is just text.
Why did RSS lose the mainstream audience?
RSS lost on two human grounds, not technical ones, and both are worth stating plainly rather than blaming the audience.
Setup cost. A feed reader starts empty. You have to know what you want before it does anything, and most people do not carry a list of twelve trusted outlets in their head. A social feed starts full and interesting on day one.
No discovery. RSS gives you exactly what you asked for and nothing else. It will never surface the thing you did not know existed, which is precisely what makes a social feed compelling and, on a bad day, compulsive.
Everything else people say — that it is technical, that it is old, that it is for developers — is downstream of those two.
What is RSS genuinely better at than an algorithm?
Four things, and none of them are aesthetic preferences.
Completeness. If a source publishes it, you see it. No ranking, no "you might have missed," nothing quietly buried because it tested badly in its first ten minutes.
Predictability. The same inputs produce the same output. Tuesday's list is not different because you lingered on something on Monday.
Anonymity at the fetch. Requesting a public file requires no identity, no account and no profile. The publisher's server sees a request; it does not see a person it has been building a picture of. That property is separate from what an app does with ads afterwards, and worth keeping distinct.
Independence. No platform sits between you and the publisher, which means no platform can change the deal later. Why a news app shouldn't need an account is the argument for keeping it that way in a consumer app.
When is an algorithm the right answer instead?
When the volume of a raw chronological list exceeds what a person can triage, which happens sooner than purists admit. "No algorithm" is a slogan, not a benefit.
Here is a measurable version of the problem rather than an invented one. The GetMyNews registry holds 92 public feeds from 37 US newsrooms — a deliberately modest list, roughly what an interested reader might assemble. On a big news day, most of those newsrooms publish on the same event, and a strictly chronological reader shows you every one of them in a row. That is not purity. That is a firehose with no valve.
So the useful question is not whether to have an algorithm. It is where the algorithm runs and who it answers to:
| Platform ranking | On-device ranking | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it runs | A company's servers | Your phone |
| What it is tied to | An identity that follows you | A local file |
| Usual target | Time spent | What you asked to see |
| What deleting the app does | Nothing | Erases the model |
The first column is what people are running from. The second is software doing an ordinary job.
Should you use a plain feed reader or an app on top of one?
Use a plain feed reader if you already know which twenty sources you trust and you want strict chronology; use an app on top if you want the openness of the format without building the list yourself. Both are reading the same files.
A dedicated RSS client is the better tool for a desk: keyboard shortcuts, mark-all-as-read, folders, full control of the subscription list. No news app will beat one at its own game, and none should claim to.
An app on top earns its place by supplying what a raw reader leaves to you. GetMyNews, to use the example this site knows best, is an RSS reader that does not look like one. Underneath: 92 public feeds from 37 US newsrooms, fetched by the phone itself, exactly as a desktop reader would fetch them. On top of that sit four things a plain reader does not do.
A starting list. The registry is already there and already sorted by topic: NPR, CBS News, NBC News, ABC News, Bloomberg, CNBC, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, TIME, The Atlantic, TechCrunch, Wired and Ars Technica among the 37.
Grouping. When several newsrooms cover one event, they collapse into a single card that names the others — the twelve-identical-items problem, solved, and more interesting than a fix, because five framings side by side is itself information. What a news aggregator is covers that mechanism in full.
Ranking that runs on the phone. The app learns which topics you swipe right on and reorders the deck. The model is a file in the app's own storage; deleting the app deletes it.
A deck with an end. A batch is about 20 cards. You reach the last one and you are finished, which is the one thing an endless feed can never offer.
That is the practical answer to is RSS still used: the format sits under almost everything, and the only real decision left to a reader is which layer to put on top of it. Either way, the substance is the same — you are reading from publishers directly, over an open format, with no platform in the middle deciding what you deserve to see.
FAQ
What is the difference between RSS and Atom?
They are two XML syndication formats that do the same job. RSS 2.0 is specified by the RSS Advisory Board and dates in its current form from 2009; Atom is an IETF standards-track format, RFC 4287, published in December 2005, with stricter rules about dates, identifiers and how content is typed. Readers support both, so as a reader the choice is invisible — publishers pick one.
Can you read a paywalled article through its RSS feed?
No. A feed carries a headline, a timestamp and usually a short summary written by the publisher, not the article body. Tapping through lands you on their page, where their paywall applies exactly as it would from a search result. What a feed can tell you in advance is which source it came from, which is why metered and hard paywalls are worth being able to tell apart before you tap.
- sources
- product
- world news