I want to be the first person to write an article touting the demise of Google+, and I want to write it just two short weeks after it launched.
That being said, the truth is I sort
of like Google+, but I don't know why. I've spent lots of time playing with the newest entrant in the "my sandbox is bigger than yours" world of Google, and I like some of what they did, but I
can't decide if I will be using it in four months or if it will crash like the much-heralded Google Wave.
First off, I enjoy the Circles concept, and I am a fan of the ease with which I
can revise the stream to reflect these individual circles vs. the whole deluge of content that is available to me. I like the interface because it's clean and quite simple. Not too
much going on in the page to distract me from what I'm supposed to be doing, which is reading content. The +1 feature is also interesting as it allows the system to surface the most interesting
content for me. These are all innovations that Facebook should be paying close attention to, as each would improve on the standard Facebook experience.
advertisement
advertisement
Now, here's what I don't like --
or rather, what I don't "get." I don't know when I would use a Hang-Out, except if I were a 15-year-old and wanted to chat with my buddies from school. I also don't know why I would
spend time reading the content in Google+ when it's a repetition of the content I see on Facebook, Twitter, and in my Flipboard pages. Flipboard may not seem like your first choice for a
competitive product, but the feed of content is the same as the selections I have showing up there, so hence the repetition.
In marketing, repetition is good; we call it
frequency. In news feeds, it's not so good. Plus, the other thing I find funny is that 65% of the feed I see on Google+ right now is articles and comments about Google+. It's a
self-congratulatory feed dominated by people trying to tell me what I should be doing on Google+! It feels a bit selfish, and hasn't yet demonstrated its value to me. Oh -- and I need a
mobile solution fast, since most of my Facebook time is spent on the phone, and that's table stakes if you want to compete.
My favorite comments so far are those people who post saying
"Google+ is 100% of my social feed now, no more Facebook feed for me." These people are the extremists, and I would love to see if they are singing the same tune in about four months.
I don't see Google+ as a replacement for Facebook at all, but rather as a competitor for Twitter. Twitter is a news feed for me, while Facebook is a personal device. My friends
from high school and college are on Facebook, and if they weren't, then I probably wouldn't be there either. There's certainly Facebook fatigue setting in these days, but the reach and
penetration it has with less-Internet-focused people is where its strength lies, and I don't see that shifting anytime soon. Google+ adoption is happening among early adopters and digital
pioneers (and apparently it's very male, according to some data I saw over the weekend). When my Dad shows up on Google+, then I'll consider it achieving critical mass. My Dad still isn't
on Twitter either, so that's my barometer for now.
Do I think Google+ plus will survive and prosper? Yes. Will it supplant Facebook and become the dominant social network in the
next 5 years? No.
I don't think Google minds, either. What Google gets out of this is data. They get share data, they get connection data, and they get an implicit approval
to use this data to supplement their advertising targeting platform. Google+ is just the precursor to the Google Graph product. I don't know if that's what they're calling it, but I
predict Google will roll out their own social graph targeting platform sometime in the next 18 months, one that will give the social targeting category a run for its money. If they integrate
Doubleclick and the Ad-Words platform with it, then Google gains a powerful advantage over the competition.
What do you think?