Very well put, but don't agree that it 'diminishes the standard of what defines great photography'. For anyone who has had an eye opening adventure through photography, from rock bottom (Flickr at the start for me) to thoughtful and critically revered contemporary and classical work - i.e. 'the canon' - there is a reasoned perspective gained, which is: there is a huge gulf between this kind of naive work and 'great photography'. Completely different spheres, which, all said and done, do not influence each other. Despite what many contemporary photography commentators say, there really is no need for any reactionary movement against the prolific output of these people, because they attract different audiences, and rightfully so. It really is just a case of live and let live. If you're eating in a restaurant, does it have any baring on you that someone else in the world is at Burger King?
Back to the sentiment of my last post however, even by the standards of the 'photo sharing sphere', this is terrible photography . The 24 hour thing is like a lure for keeping a certain type of photography enthusiast perpetually ignorant to important conceptual work (which doesn't mean what you think it does, benjiboy). But when we're talking about other people's ignorance, it eventually becomes a political debate. For the sake of the integrity of this community and its newcomers, ignore shit like this and read any number of history of photography books, lend or buy monographs and go to exhibitions if at all possible.
APUG really needs a reading list sticky thread.
Exactly right. Exhibitions and monographs are never shit.
As for the reading list sticky, I can't wait to see how much shit gets put there.