What I am really interested in:
A short rant
on what Pinterest
is and is not.
Pinterest is not an image storage site.
1. Image retrieval is not why eleven million people a month browse through Pinterest for periods averaging 40 minutes per visit.
People use Pinterest to collect and share concepts, large and small, which usually (but not always) take the form of images linked to other web sites.
The concepts being shared are the reason for the site's existence. The images are the bait used to illustrate and amplify and creatively express
the concepts. The layers of meaning behind the concepts (intended and inadvertent) are the fascinating part of Pinterest. The layers
of meaning behind the concepts are why this site has so quickly become endlessly absorbing for so many types of users on so many levels.
2. One of the most surprising aspects of Pinterest is the complicated, innovative, expressive ways users have evolved to name their collections, on all levels.
Naming has become part of the fun. The intensity of this creative, highly personalized naming activity is NOT
focused on providing efficient image retrieval.
| Users are embedding meaning in the file names they use, adding one more layer
of interest and expression to the way they present their Pinterest collections. These carefully crafted names are part of the meaning
behind the concepts. The names are entwined with the concepts being staged.
3. Why do people love this? While it is a social site, with public user collaboration producing the core of the content, Pinterest has evolved into a personal and expressive
form of communication, encouraging site-wide user behaviors that do not appear to be duplicated anywhere else in other free public online forums.
Why do users spend time inventing interesting and creative file names when a simple noun would work for retrieval purposes? When does naming a
concept become an art form? How much intentional meaning do these pin names contain? Is it possible to identify and measure the creativity used
in all of this naming activity in an analytical way, without getting sidetracked by the images themselves, the concepts being represented or the
semiotics of all of this word play?