Now that Google+ is ‘stable’ and almost anybody who wants to can get on it, where’s its place in social media?
|One of G+’s early adopters|
I mean, if we break down ‘social media’ into the threesome of Google+, Twitter and Facebook, what sort of stuff should be appearing on G+?
Some early adopters have decided that, for them, it is the new home of their blogs. I’m not sure that I can agree with this use. Well, definitely not for me anyways. I like using Blogger to host christopherengland.com because I have a certain level of customisation at my fingertips. I’m not stuck in a regimented framework or style. Ok, yes, a blog is a blog is a blog, but at least I can sort of pick the mood and the background and the masthead and the number of columns and the fonts and their colours. Can’t do that on Facebook or G+.
But, who should be viewing my G+ page, compared to seeing my entries appear in their ‘stream’? I mean, is my G+ page a method of having conversations with others or a method of ‘publishing’ stuff, or a place where I should be sharing all those every so funny photos of me an’ me mates behaving badly whilst drunk?
You get my point, I hope. What I’m saying is that G+ isn’t quite a replacement for Facebook or for Twitter, and the majority of multi-platform social media users will just operate a G+ page as they do a Facebook account and a Twitter account, using third party applications or extensions to ensure that anything and everything they say is replicated across all three.
I mean, much as I hate the clunky communist dictatorial methodology that is Facebook, am I going to close my Facebook account? Nope. Am I going to stop spurting stuff on Twitter? Nope. Am I going to stop using G+? Hmmmm. Early days of course, but I’d say ‘Nope’ to that too. So, people like me are now stuck straddling three platforms instead of two. This can’t be the right way to go about things, surely?
In my case, as I’ve explained before, to supplement my daily blog post I always used to have another place where I’d park random sillies and outbursts of a lesser nature. All that’s happened is that I’ve stopped using the previous place and shifted to using G+ instead. But is that really what I should be using it for?
It’s hard to see exactly what others are using it for. Maybe for them it is replacing their witterings on Facebook, but I don’t think so.
I can only conclude that in order to ‘succeed’, G+ is going to have to appeal to people as the main place to dump a certain type or style of posting, maybe even something ‘new’, and maybe this future purpose is not already adequately provided for by Facebook and Twitter. But what is it?
I fear that G+ users need to shape and mould G+ in order to make it the must-be place, else it’ll just be the ‘whatever’ place it is already being dismissed as by a lot of those mentally sucked in to the Facebook experience.