Google+ has been a hot topic in the Twitterverse and other social media scenes recently, with many people having hopped on board already. Most people seem to enjoy it and think it will be the best thing since Facebook, and it very well may revolutionize social networking. Conversely, social networks come and go, and Google+ could flop just like its predecessor—Google Buzz.
Here are three reasons why Google+ will fail:
- Google+ has a heavy time commitment
Three entities dominate social media right now: Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter. Facebook and LinkedIn are similar in that they both involve a significant time investment to “do it right”. Twitter functions on the opposite end of the spectrum and involves a very low time commitment. Sure, you can spend time reading your timeline, but the whole thing is basically posting a 140 character (or less) message and wiping your hands clean of it.
Facebook and LinkedIn both take a LONG time to setup a profile. We all know how addictive Facebook can get—to the point where I know some of you open your web browser and out of habit begin to type Facebook into the address bar even if it’s not the website you opened your browser for in the first place (its okay–I do it too). While it’s hard to really get lost in LinkedIn, it serves as the perfect complement to Facebook because it’s a professional tool. LinkedIn and Facebook are not competing with one another.
Enter Google+. Because you can distinguish between various circles, you have an opportunity to be a jackass with your friends in one circle, and drink tea with your pinky in the air in another circle. Professional and casual have converged on one interface in Google+. Therein lays the problem. We have a casual social network in Facebook, and a professional social network in LinkedIn, and we have spent countless hours on both. Why would we take even more time to recreate full profiles for both, and then continue to clock hours interacting with our different networks when we already have equipment in place to do that? Just because there is another social network out there, doesn’t mean we all will flock to it. And to clarify, when I say ‘flock to it’, I mean really use Google+; not just create a profile and ignore it.
Will Google+ prove to be 1 too many social networks? Photo courtesy of Google Images.
2. People will confuse their circles
The Google+ differentiator is having multiple circles to communicate with. Part of the setup is the ability to have a single contact in more than one circle. For instance, I could have my friend Andrew in my “The Pits” circle (never mind the name—inside joke), and I could also have him in my “Professional Contacts” circle. That’s a case of easy discernibility. But what about when the dividing lines become less distinct between circles? It’s very possible I could throw Andrew in a few different circles, forget who all is in that circle, and post a comment that was meant for the OTHER circle he’s in. Best case scenario, the circle ignores the comment. Middle case scenario, the circle gets confused and asks some questions about what I’m talking about. Worst case scenario (which is not too far-fetched), the person or people in that circle who weren’t supposed to see the comment become outraged. Still want to stay active on Google+ after something like that?
End result: In an effort to bring people closer together, Google+ moves some people farther apart.
3. It’s not Facebook
Facebook is so embedded in society that we use it as a verb. We are accustomed to its interface and intricacies, and we accept it for its inabilities. As weird as it sounds, Facebook is our friend. Everyone we know is friends with Facebook. We have been through a lot together and we will not part ways with it just because someone new and popular moved into town.
Facebook may not have been the original social networking site, but relative to Google+ it has a significant first-mover advantage.
@RajNATION
Good posts. But I don’t think G+ will fail. Here’s a few short reasons why.
Not sure if you had a MySpace…but if you did, think back to the reason why you left in the first place. MySpace was becoming creepy, saturated, and filled with spam. In swooped Facebook. It was simple. It was exclusive. I couldn’t wait to get that .edu email address to sign up. But before I got that address, I could sign up because anyone could join…now people have their grandparents on FB. It’s not exclusive and it’s saturated.
I don’t think G+ will replace FB but I think it will act as a way for the “twenty-somethings”/social media whores power users to get their space back.
As far as the “circle mistake” you wrote about, I see how that could happen. But this is how I look at circles…more like a list on twitter. I’ve been using them more as a way to simplify my feed. For example, I have a general circle called “friends.” So I use that as a way to see what my friends are posting. But everything I’ve shared on G+ is completely public, goes to all my circles, and anyone can read. That’s just because I think twice about everything I post on the internet so I won’t care who see’s it.
That’s just a few of my thoughts. It’s a shame Zuckerberg isn’t playing nice with G+. Id love a feature that could find your FB friends on G+. But the people at FB aren’t allowing that to happen. They feel everyone’s friends list is property of Facebook.
Anyways, time will tell. I just hope G+ is here to stay. I’m enjoying a new toy to play with and once the iPhone and iPad apps are released it will be less time consuming. Then I guess 3rd party apps (HootSuite, TweetDeck) are next
I was not a part of myspace but from secondhand information I agree with your reasoning for why it failed. I hope Google+ doesn’t fail, but I just don’t see the common person adopting it in addition to facebook. If it lasts, I think it will likely be used by the people you stated, social media whores
This is a really badly written article. Maybe do some actual research before you just post some predictions. Maybe use the service for a few weeks.
http://www.fastcodesign.com/1664523/google-designer-the-4-problems-in-social-networking-that-we-fixed
If you don’t like a social service, then don’t use it. Don’t pretend to be a “tech blogger”, or try to “inform people”. It’s good you voice your “opinions”, but actually try to form educated thoughts. It’s sad to see others promote this post, when it lacks and real substance. Go to actual social media or tech blogs, and try to learn something.
It appears you work for Google, so you have an inherent bias. I welcome any opposing viewpoints towards my blog, provided that you have something constructive to say in response. Telling me I’m wrong and not giving any rebuttal outside of saying I should read other tech blogs is really not constructive.
As for badly written, I’m pretty sure there are no grammatical errors in my post. Lastly, this is a blog, it’s purely my own opinion and nothing else. I have never claimed to be a social media expert or a tech expert, but if a topic piques my interest and I feel compelled enough to write about it, then I use this blog to share my thoughts. I am okay with disagreement, but please offer an opposing argument in addition to saying I’m wrong. Personally, I hope G+ is a success, but trying to steal mindshare from an incredibly mature market just doesn’t seem plausible to me.
I don’t work for Google. I just care about good blogging. When this post ended up in front of me, I just felt compelled to respond. I don’t know you at all. I made a long post responding to each of your points, but didn’t post it because it seemed to be too negative towards you. Here is a short response to your post points:
By badly written I mean that you don’t really cite any reputable examples to back up your points. You just seem to voice opinions: Facebook and LinkedIn take a “long” time to set up, Facebook and LinkedIn are not competing against each other, etc.
I would argue that many things you “claim are true”, are plainly just the opposite. I’m not writing a post about why, “Google+ will succeed!” here, but I am saying the conclusions you come to are false.
You also seem to don’t understand how circles work, because if you read the previous posted article (or the many others on the web), , especially on Google’s website) you would see many people active in social media would understand them perfectly fine. Your outlandish “example” how a comment could be read by someone, and they would hate you forever, is just illogical. Your basically saying that users are dumb and don’t understand anything.
Your last point makes it sound like we all have to use Facebook, we are addicted to it and can’t quit it. “We accept Facebook and it’s inabilities”. We don’t, well at least I don’t. I use Facebook’s services for my job, I get paid for using it. I am not undermining it’s usefulness, but I don’t just accept it’s limitations.
Users of tech are supposed to demand for rewarding social experiences (this is why tech blogs exist). If there is something you don’t like, talk to developers, maybe they will change the product for the better. Just don’t accept Facebook as the ultimate social service that will be around forever. People said that about Myspace and the many social networks before it.
My response to you was not to be very negative or attacking to you. I was not “going for your throat” as Mr. Buckley mentioned on Twitter.
I simply think that when writing blog posts, you should try to write them well, support your points, either with facts or past trends. You owe that to your readers. There are many reasons that Google+ may not be successful as Facebook, but that doesn’t mean that it will fail.
I think that saying something will “fail”, makes readers of your blog not at least try a good social service like Google+. They may find aspects of it much better than existing social networks. They may demand for innovation to continue at Facebook. All these are positive things, and writing off something as a failure two weeks into the beta is simply inhibiting progress.
I hope you don’t see this an personal “attack”. I think blogs exist for sparking a good conversation, and that’s what I think this is.
Anon,
Thanks for clarifying. Those are all valid points you make. My mistake for thinking you worked at Google. I saw the website you typed in for your post and assumed that meant you worked at Google. If you read through some of my previous articles, I typically do back up what I say with facts/findings. In this case, I did not do that, and wrote purely off of personal opinions and predictions. Perhaps I should have had some facts to back it up.
I do think though that Facebook has so much dominance it will be hard for G+ to take over. MySpace failed because it pretty much became dirty. There was so much spam, profile pages became way too customizable to the point where it hurt your eyes to read, and the site as a whole didn’t really adapt to a changing environment. Facebook does an incredible job of rapidly adapting. Think of how much progress it has made since its birth. I don’t believe it will flame out like MySpace. This is a hard market to steal for G+. I think what will happen is what Marty Buckley said in that G+ will become more of a hub for tech savvys who want a new space for themselves.