I appreciate viewing photographic images, but the question is how to cut through all the noise. On the internet almost nothing is curated and billions of images continue to flood in.... and yet, photography is a most democratic art.
Internet sharing of photographic images is approaching (if it's not already there) a new (actually very very old) kind of language. Instead of communicating with words, folks are now communicating with each other via images. Instead of calling all your friends on the phone or sending emails "telling" them the nuances of your latest situation/adventure/encounter, you can just "show" it to them in a shorthand faux unmediated style.
The uses of photography: art, documentation, advertising, persuasion, and now as a rapid shorthand democratic language for broadcasting to all your friends and contacts a taste of your experience.
But like any rapidly growing & changing language there is the risk of creating a "tower of babel" situation. Perhaps at some point this kind of photography will be recognized for what it is, and someone will put out a kind of dictionary?
So my point is that it's not an either-or situation. In the rapid shorthand communication genre, the facebook camera-cellphone has its place - and for other intentions, film has a place as well.
Normal - Wide - Tele