Either Google+ is growing by leaps and bounds, or it is a deserted “ghost town” -- take your pick. Actually the truth may lie somewhere in between these statements, which form the extremes of opinion about Google’s new social media platform.
Google+ launched last year and has built up a membership base of tens of millions of people, who however apparently never visit or do anything on the site. The “Google+ is growing” side is best represented by, surprise, Google: according to figures disclosed in January by CEO Larry Page, who said Google+ had attracted 90 million registered users. That’s up from 40 million users in the first half of October -- an impressive growth curve, by any measure; indeed, Ancestry.com’s Paul Allen predicted it could have 400 million members by the end of this year.
But do these masses actually visit or do anything on the site? An article published today by the Wall Street Journal throws a big bucket of cold water on Google+ boosters, saying data from comScore shows Google+ is a “virtual ghost town,” with users “signing up -- but then not doing much there.” According to the comScore figures, PC users who visited Google+ spent an average of three minutes per month -- that’s per month, not per day -- on the site from September to January.
A Google spokesperson responded to the WSJ article with a typically opaque statement to the effect that the comScore data is “dramatically lower” than Google’s own data. Assuming that this wasn’t intended to call comScore’s basic methodology into question, I would speculate the big difference must be due to different definitions of user activity. For example, Google might count a person as visiting Google+ if they have a Google+ page open in the background of their browser or remain signed in while using other Google apps, while comScore only counts periods of activity on the actual Google+ profile. If this is the case then I am going with comScore. Otherwise I’m not sure what might explain the disparity. Any thoughts?
Since there seems to be a very wide range of opinion about Google+ usage stats, I’ve decided to take my own poll. So, dear readers, do you use Google+? How often do you use it? And what do you think of the WSJ’s “ghost town” characterization? Is it fair or overstated?
COMMENTARY: I remember back in November 2011, when Slate's Farhad Manjoo called Google+ "Dead," then expressed shock that it could have 40 million and speculated that people weren't doing anything much once they joined Google+. Erik Sass calls Google+ a "virtual ghost town," and voices the same feelings about Google+ users that Slate did. Well, I am here to tell you that I love my little "Ghost Town," and spend time on Google+ every single day. In fact, I am logged into the site right now. I like Google+ because it is a minimalist social sight. People like me like to connect and engage with others who don't like layers of features, most of which you cannot even find. I am too busy researching, consulting and blogging, so I don't need the extra hassel of navigating myself through a site like Facebook. Keep it simple, is my motto, and Google+ fits my style.
Erik Sass, Farhad Manjoo and others who have criticized Google+ are not trying to enjoy Google+. To them joinging Google+ was a one-time experiment. The problem with these critics is that they had higher expectations. They seem to forget that Google+ has only been open 10 months, and is still feeling its way around, taking its time to build a social networking experience that is different than Facebook. They don't want to be a Googler+. So instead of criticizing Google+, just go with the flow. Make time to have fun, connect and engage. Do something. Nothing happens unless you do things on Google+. All these spoiled Facebook fanatics, will never be satisfied. As far as I am concerned, go back to Facebook, and just stay there.
I love the fact that Google+ allows me to connect with primarily technology and social geeks like myself. We are predominantly male, but historically most geeks have been male, so why should this be a surprise. For me Google+ is my ideal social network. It doesn't cramp my style. I feel special on Google" precisely because there aren't too many of us. I like it simple, which has been my biggest criticism of Facebook. People criticize Google+, but they fail to forget that LinkedIn at the end of December 2011 had about 100 million users. Google+ now has 100 million, and we did it in only 9 months, while LinkedIn took nearly a decade.
Courtesy of an article dated February 28, 2012 appearing in MediaPost Publications The Social Graf
Comments