I was reminded a couple of days ago about some thoughts I've had for a while now regarding Flickr and social networking. So, here is what got me back on this topic. I posted a few pictures to Flickr and then used Flickr's great blogging tools to add some to my personal blog. Now, many people who read my personal blog are also in my Contacts set on Flickr - so, people who see my pictures on Flickr are also likely to see them on the blog. The odd thing is this: people comment more often on Flickr to the same pictures that appear on my blog - even when the pictures are more contextualized when placed within a blog post. So, why is this? What makes Flickr so much more condusive to interaction?

There has been a lot of hype about how great Flickr is as a photo sharing tool... it's easy to use, has a great interface, shows you recent uploads from your friends and everyone, and produces easy to follow slideshows. There's been just as much talk of Flickr for its popularity with bloggers - what more could you ask for than direct upload to your blog and a script generator for various sizes of your photo. I dug around a little on searches such as "Flickr social networking" etc, but found very little. A ton on the fact that it's great for social networking, but nobody was really asking why.

One hypothesis is that it is more about mutual contacts. I can see who my friends are friends with and so forth. Over time, we tend to form clusters, each person interacting in a more intertwined fashion. I've seen it happen. But it still does not explain why these bloggers are commenting on my Flickr set and not my blog. I am missing part of the explanation somewhere.

Ok, what else makes Flickr unique? Obviously something - enough for Yahoo to take notice and purchase Flickr. Given this acquisition and the release of Yahoo 360, it would appear that community is the pillar behind these decisions. It would seem that, aside from offering the most comprehensive technological photo sharing tool out there, Flickr has created a cohesive community. A blog is social networking - so is Flickr. And yet they differ - the community structure is different.

One crucial difference between blogs and Flickr may be the cornerstone to this mystery. With Flickr, you have the ability to add notes, comments, and tags to photos. On Flickr, you can add a comment to any part of the photo; you can also tag a photo (yours or someone else's) to assign it to that keyword category. Since the tags are searchable, your photos are always coming up and being viewed by others - no matter when you took it. So, people are interacting with the photo in a way not otherwise possible. This creates an ongoing conversation about the photo and the fluidity of its meaning, constantly revising where it belongs in the taxonomy. And, perhaps as importantly, this interaction amongst the Flickr community gives one a sense of contributing to an overall archive of shared experiences.

What do you think?