Republican political strategists have apparently wised up to the power of social media. “With new tools that weren’t available on social media in 2012, campaigns will have the ability to target ads at very specific audiences,” The Wall Street Journal reports. “If a candidate takes a controversial stance on illegal immigration, a rival campaign could be sharing it within minutes with Latino voters on Facebook and Twitter using targeted ads.” 

Contrary to many an analyst’s urging, Re/code’s well-placed sources don’t think Google and Twitter would make a good fit. For starters, “Google already has everything it needs from Twitter,” it writes. “Earlier this year, the search giant inked two deals with the smaller company. The first brought tweets into search results … The second brought Twitter ads into Google’s massive ad server, DoubleClick.” 

As more brands use influencers to establish credibility with consumers, the model becomes less potent, The New York Times argues. “The strategy is becoming a bit of a gamble,” it writes. “The more brands that use influencers for marketing campaigns on social platforms like YouTube, Twitter and Instagram, the less impact each influencer has.” 

The Huffington Post and some other digital news outlets have egg on their faces after sharing a fake Instagram account purportedly documenting a migrant’s journey from Dakar, Senegal, to Spain. “The main takeaway for journalists is clear -- it’s critical to treat all social content with a heavy dose of skepticism,” writes Storyful reporter Eliza Mackintosh. 

Mashable considers Google’s failed attempt at social networking, i.e., the story behind Google+. “Google's effort to build a social network to rival Facebook began with a bold, company-wide yell,” it writes. “Now Google appears to be winding down Google+ with barely a whimper.”