All photo sharing isn’t created equal
Pics, ‘Grams, Snaps…what does it mean to share a photo these days?
On Oct 26th, Benedict Evans tweeted these stats:
Photos shared/day:
Facebook — 350m
Snapchat — 350m
Whatsapp — 400m
Instagram: 55m
There are a few ways to react to these numbers:
- Wow, Snapchat users share as many photos as Facebook users?! That’s some impressive growth!
- Holy cow, Instagram’s lame! Snapchat users are already sharing 6x as many photos.
- (If you’re in the US and don’t chat with anyone outside of the US) — What’s a Whatsapp??
Based on the first two reactions, the followup might be: Zuck should hurry up and acquire Snapchat for at least $6B dollars! Everyone knows photos are core to the Facebook experience, especially when they dropped a billy on Instagram to protect their turf made of polaroids.
But what does it really mean to “share a photo” these days? If all sharing isn’t created equal, how should we compare (and value) a shared photo on Snapchat vs. Instagram?
When we look at the stats above, I believe an apples-to-oranges comparison is being made because sharing a photo on Instagram, with its one-to-many audience is closer to publishing vs. the same activity on Snapchat is closer to communicating.
We communicate frequently, but publish rarely. As Dave McClure and Fred Wilson note, these “published” photos are more monetizable than photos used for communication, even if their volume is significantly lower.
But what’s happening is that more than ever, sharing a photo can be both a form of communication and/or a publication. As Benedict points out:
“People aren’t using Instagram for photos, WhatsApp for text, Line for stickers… they’re using everything for everything. These apps are not in different categories — they’re direct competitors for time* and attention.
Even if it’s the same photo — a Snapchat photo is not equal to an Instagram photo which is not equal to a Facebook photo. Here’s how a single photo could elicit multiple responses depending on the network:
On Instagram: Nice filter and cropping on the SFO welcome sign!
On Facebook: Cool, Adam’s at the airport — wonder if he’s coming home?
On Snapchat: Think that’s clever, check out this. (which could then lead to more back and forth photo exchanges)
Before Zuck snaps up Snapchat it’s important to consider how each platform is used, whether it’s for communicating or publishing, and what the expected posts per user ratio should be (as this directly impacts how effective advertising is — because some user experiences are inherently more monetizable via advertising than others.)
While Snapchat’s volume of photo shares is impressive any way you slice it, that stat alone doesn’t mean it’s anywhere close to 6x more valuable than Instagram.
*In their Oct 2013 earnings call, Facebook highlighted the fact that with Instagram, Facebook commands more mobile time spent on the service than YouTube, Pandora, Yahoo, Twitter, Pinterest, Tumblr, AOL, Snapchat, and LinkedIn combined, according to comScore.
It’ll be fun to watch over the next few days/weeks as the internet tries to gauge Snapchat’s true value and make sense of what a photo is truly worth.
Update: Woah!! Fun is an understatement. The internet exploded with discussion around news that FB (and Google) tried to acquire Snapchat for 3-4B respectively. More here.)
