I’ve been playing around on Google+ for almost a week now and wanted to add my list of opinions to the millions that have already been thrown around the web so far. If you haven’t checked it out, I will say that it is NOT a Facebook, nor a Twitter killer. Here are my top takeaways from toying with the service:
1 -Seamless integration with your Google Account. I see Google+ as being a killer app when it comes to social media for teams or small businesses. The ability to share content within small circles as well as jump between group video chats and have your Google Docs at your finger tips is very cool. I’m sure Google is counting on the adoption not just to grow the + network but also to get more people to switch to Google Apps.
2 – Making you put your connections in a container as you connect is helpful. Bigtime. I feel like Facebook for me has turned into me sharing content with a large network of people, whom I know in very different capacities. Some people might love the Social Media content, others may hate it. And I know I can put friends into Groups on Facebook – it’s just too much work for me at this point. With Google+, you have to add friends to a circle (friends, aquaintences, work, etc) as you connect, making sharing and grouping much more manageable.
3 – Google hangouts has smoked Facebook video chat. The client is super light, easy to use and though we may not use group video chat much, I think more and more people will use Hangouts as an easy way to do video conferencing on the cheap. iChat was the best experience I’ve had so far, but now you’re removing the requirement to have a mac.
4 – No one is here. It’s nice to not be bombarded with brands or businesses or tons of people who want to connect at the moment. I feel like I’m very much in control of my network. We’re still defining the follow etiquette here but I don’t feel at all compelled to follow everyone back that adds me, especially if I don’t know them. Or, you can always add people you don’t know into a separate circle and share only what’s appropriate.
5 – Conversation: For whatever reason there’s a ton of interaction here. Way more than Facebook or Twitter from what I can see so far. Being able to see all the comments on a post makes it easier to jump in to the conversation instead of using @replies where you only see the pieces you’re involved with. Very cool so far, but will it last?
What Sucks.
1 – The population of Google+ right now seems to be almost all techies and marketers. Makes sense though since we love anything shiny and new, so we’ll move first but that has some major downsides right now. There’s a lot of noise. I see a lot of duplicate posts throughtout the day – way more so that on Twitter or Facebook and it’s distracting
2 – Conversation: No threaded comments make popular posts from folks like Robert Scoble and Chris Brogan eat my feed and take up real estate several screens deep. I wish we could see some threaded comments soon, or that the system would recognize that if more than 3 people have shared a post that are in my network, I only need to see it once.
3 – Lack of a Filter: I do like the idea of circles and the way following works on Google+. I can follow whomever I want and they decide whether to follow me back or which circle to put me in. However, what would be awesome would be some sort of application process where I could filter content from certain people. For instance, I wish we could create tags for each post we share (generic tags, but that were available to those who are in our circles). That way, the people following us could choose only the topics or tags that they want to follow, instead of getting a firehose of content and comments.
4 – Search: I don’t feel like there is a good discovery engine for meeting new people or jumping into topical conversations yet. Twitter is certainly the best at this (or at least they were until searches became filled with brands trying to sell things based on keywords). Maybe I’ve missed it but I haven’t found a good way to meet NEW people yet on Google+.
5 – The pace: I’m still in love with Twitter’s ulta fast pace of information and being forced to get your point across in 140 characters. It’s super easy to meet new people, share content and interact publicly – which is especially key for businesses to show that they can do online customer service. Google+ seems like it’s easy to follow people but not as simple to jump into a conversation then get out. That may change as more people get onto the service and start tailoring content to different circles, but for me I’m stil a Twitter diehard.
Bottom line? I like it. I think it has real promise, especially for both business networking and tailoring content towards certain groups. It’s great way to keep your personal separate from your professional (if that’s what you want), while maintaining different levels of connections – but on the same network. Honestly, I’ve already started using Facebook a little less (not giving it up yet though). I’m also very curious to see what the opportunities for brands are going to be.
So what do you think? Are you on Google+ yet and what are your first impressions. How do you use it differently than Facebook or Twitter? And what’s the thing you like the most and hate the most about it so far? Fire away in the comments!
It’s been said that Curiosity Killed the Cat. Maybe, but that was so last century. Curiosity, is now what’s going to save your skin (and your business).
I know I’m not the only person who thinks that curiosity is probably one of the most overlooked and under appreciated qualities in the business world. Having a thirst for figuring out systems, taking things (and ideas) apart, and reinventing the way they work is now one of the most important qualities to have in an employee or business owner.
I also think that the businesses that are going to succeed over the next decade are the ones that are the most curious. The ones that do the best jobs of embracing change, using new tools, and step out of their comfort zone.
Call it curiosity, call it R&D, call it professional development or social research. The fact is that no matter what business you’re in, it’s important. That journey of discovery deserves to have time and dollars put behind it. Google does a great job of embracing curiosity with it’s “20 percent time” policy. In a nutshell, engineers are allowed to spend one day per week working on ways to develop new ideas, fix problems or work on projects that are not in their job descriptions. That, my friends is developing a culture of the curious.
Can you name at least one question YOUR business (or employer) has posed in the past year that has led to a new discovery or a change in the way you operate? A new way of reaching customers? A new way of operating that is out of the traditional comfort zone? Let me know in the comments. If there isn’t a culture of curiosity where you are – why not? And what are you doing to help create that culture- and save your skin? Because now it’s the LACK of curiosity that will kill the cat. Meow.
I read a good piece over at Sacrilicious Marketing about how over the past few months there’s been a lot of pushback from news organizations (particularly those owned by NewsCorp) against search engines like Google who are linking and indexing their content, making it easier for regular folks like us to find information that is current and relevant to our search queries – and it got me thinking.
NewsCorp threatened to de-index all of its content from Google and Bing unless they were paid for it. Old Rupert (amongst others) is trying to usher out the era of the free web…. and it looks like it worked. Both Google and Bing paid up (how much, I don’t know).
Major labels like EMI have also removed the music videos of their artists and restricted embedding, moving them to their own site Vevo (with the help of Google) instead of having them just run on YouTube. They want to be paid for the views or move to a platform that has a business model in place that works more in their favor, much like the major TV networks did with HULU. There’s a brilliant piece on this from the band OK Go.
Now the New York Times will be putting up a pay-wall in 2011. The details are sketchy as of yet, but it looks like it will be some kind of metered system.
I don’t know how this is going to play out. It does seem like the era of completely free content may be coming to an end, and that sucks because what makes the web so amazing is that free sharing of content and the speed at which FREE can travel. On the other hand, it IS their content and these companies can do whatever they want with it.
But should larger sites be able to demand payment from search engines to index their content? How does that cost then get passed on to users? Will they also demand payments from ISPs next, since that content gets pushed through their data pipes? Isn’t that just cable with text? I get worried that content will become too restricted and that the byproduct of that is a world where MY internet is different from YOUR internet (I know this does already exist to some degree – just ask China).
What do YOU think? Are you willing to pay for content from some of the major news organizations if you consume it online or will you just go somewhere else? What about the implications for net neutrality? Hit me in the comments, if you please.
Piggybacking on the post about Google’s real-time search that includes Twitter and Facebook – they’re also taking mobile search very seriously. Soon, when you search ‘pizza’ from a smartphone, Google will give you the most relevant results based on your search terms and location. Again, how will this affect the way websites are optimized?
Obviously this benefits the user because I’m getting better results (in theory). But it also benefits Google. The more relevant they can make searches, the more precisely they can target ads to those users. The more relevant the ad, the more likely the user will click. The more they click, the more $$$$$ Google takes in. And so on and so forth….
Google is definitely betting that the next big play will be mobile and I agree. The first big wakeup calls for the mobile web didn’t really happen until this year with the Iran election and the death of Michael Jackson almost breaking the internet. And that is just the start. As more and more devices and apps become location aware, it will change the way we search and the results that we expect.
If you haven’t heard about Google’s SideWiki – you’re not alone. While it’s gotten a lot of ink type from SM bloggers and some traction on Twitter, lots of people still don’t know what it is, what it does, and what its implications are for your website and your brand.
Basically, Google SideWiki is a huge way to annotate the web. Think of it as seeing comments, additional links, and wikipedia style annotations alongside every webpage you visit. According to Google’s Video, you can link up additional text on the page to point to your annotation, or leave a comment on the page as a whole. Dont want to leave your mark? You can still view everyone else’s comments and rate whether they’re useful or not, or share a comment via Twitter or Facebook.
Is it useful? I think it’s too early to tell, but if it gains momentum and hits a critical mass of users (which could be likely since its now part of Google Toolbar) than I think it could be a massive game changer. What I’ve seen so far when I’ve checked out major brand sites such as Wal-Mart and Apple (screengrab)- and found some interesting things. On the first few entries you’ve got some informative information – how the company wars formed, a link to a past version of the site, etc. But under that (comment 3) you’ve got someone who’s highlighting some of the not so great things that Apple does. Keep in mind that this is all on Apple’s official webpage via the SideWiki.
First, I should note that you need Google Toolbar to use, view, and contribute to the Wiki. So just by going to Apple.com you wont’ see the entries. But I think this has huge implications for brands in particular.
One of the first things I always hear when I talk to businesses about social is that they are hesitant to get into the conversation because in many cases they’re afraid of things that users, competitors, and detractors will say about them on Social Channels. But the see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil doesn’t cut it anymore. Peeps are already talking out there, you might as well engage. But here’s where the game changes. With Sidewiki, there really is no longer an option to stay out of the social sphere. It’s gone off the reservation and right into your front yard. That’s the difference. The conversation has been moved from taking place exclusively on Twitter and FB, to your webpage.
I’m torn on this to be honest. I do think it’s cool that users can add info about a page that may not be obvious and share content that people would find really useful. But Jeff Jarvis brought up a good point:
Google is trying to take interactivity away from the source and centralize it. This isn’t like Disqus, which enables me to add comment functionality on my blog. It takes comments away from my blog and puts them on Google. That sets up Google in channel conflict vs me.
And even though I’m a firm believer that you engage your users on their platforms as much as possible, I think could be seen as a power grab to encourage people to comment using Google’s tools instead of on my site or other tools that we’re already having to monitor such as Twitter, FB, etc. It fragments the community into those who choose to comment with Sidewiki and those who choose to comment through a site’s internal comment system (or Disqus). On the other hand it gives everyone the option to comment on any site and any story, whether there is an existing comment system or not. Censorship be damned!
But at the end of the day, when / if this hits critical mass, companies, bloggers and news sites are going to have a new set of forces to contend with. You’re now by default participating in social media, albeit on Google’s terms.
What do you think about all of this? Will it spawn a new gold rush of online ‘curators’ who post tons of comments on sites they frequent to position themselves as experts? Will it encourage brandjacking, flame wars, or just be a dumpster for comment spam? Or does it give power to the people through the use of comments throughout the web? I think it remains to be seen. But in the meantime… I’d highly suggest you check out the SideWiki, play around, and most importantly, Claim your Sidewiki space. As an website owner, you’ll be the first commenter on your OWN site. Offering a brief welcome message . Use the space to talk about your business or what people can expect on your site. There’s a great post from Bill Hartzer with a step by step for claiming your space.
Oh and if you feel so obliged, leave a message on my page using the comment section OR the SideWiki.
I saw this courtesy of Tim O’Reilly on Twitter today (follow me on Twitter…I won’t steer your wrong).
A Google Engineer has built an open source app that lets you surf across google earth using a Wii Board. Looks like tons of fun and I can’t wait to try it out.
Check out the video below and much more info can be found HERE
I’ve been playing around on Google+ for almost a week now and wanted to add my list of opinions to the millions that have already been thrown around the web so far. If you haven’t checked it out, I will say that it is NOT a Facebook, nor a Twitter killer. Here are my top takeaways from toying with the service:
If you haven’t heard about 
