The Trouble with Tags

Over the past few weeks, I've noticed a new presence in the clickstream for the ol' blogerama: Technorati tags. Because this little site is partly an ongoing media laboratory, I'm always tinkering to see what works, what doesn't, and how people react. So I threw a few tags into the mix - you know, stuff like "Tom DeLay" or "Pope" or "Mets." And lately, they've brought some folks a calling - but nothing major, not like Google or James Wolcott, or Wilson and Jarvis. Just a few. And frankly, I'm not sure what they added on the outbound experience for readers; it you clicked on my DeLay tag, you got pages of blogs that mentioned the GOP Exterminator - but so what? I could've searched. (I've also been messing around with del.icio.us - a bookmark-sharing site - on Fred's recommendation; after all, he invested in the company. And I've taken to using Flickr for my photographs, and the tag system there works very well. You can see some of my favorite pictures on the lower right of this page; my photostream is here - let me know what you think). I know that tags are supposed to create a seamless patchwork of intellectually-consistent linking, a new "thought-stream" through the blogosphere. Maybe they will, and maybe they won't. For now, I don't see a business model. There's only so many nickels AdSense clicks are gonna bring in. And I don't see bloggers digging paid-for tag placement any time soon. So I suspect tags are just a nifty feature. That doesn't mean they're a bad investment, however. Blogs are hot - almost like a small toaster oven of super-heated value, compared to the vast boiling cauldron of the the Net bubble of the late 90s. Some of these puppies will surely sell to companies looking for the next big thing. And that's their value to their founders and their investors.