I recently decided to move the focus away from the blog and treat it more as a repository for what I am writing. As such, new posts now initially appear over at Google+ to take advantage of the superior interaction we experience there.
To take this one stage further I have decided to start an email newsletter (an idea I have been toying with for a while) to go beyond the normal post writing process and look at things in a different way and, perhaps, from a different angle.
The newsletter will supplement both the blog and activities on social networks. There will be the obligatory round-ups of what’s been happening but I plan to throw in a lot more conversationalist stuff: ideas, thoughts for possible posts, perhaps some links to items I’ve found interesting recently – whatever seems to fit at the time.
I have been running the Colin’s Thoughts blogette (is that a word? it is now) over at Posterous for a while but will most likely move my thoughts away from there to the newsletter.
It’s all about you!
As ever, I want you to tell me what you want. Got questions to ask? Go for it! Want to know my opinion on something? Ask away. Want some clarification or explanantion on a post? Let me know and I’ll see what I can do.
If you sign up I want to make sure you get what YOU want and that it’s not just all about me. I hope you get some value from this – if not TELL ME!
You can subscribe using the form at the top right of any page.
Google+ is constantly compared to Facebook and under extreme pressure to perform but is that pressure realistic?
Every time someone posts an estimate of the number of Google+ users the tech media explodes with a glut of stories and posts proclaiming the service to be either a failure or proving its success depending on the point of view or prejudice of the author. Now is no exception.
Using the recent figures showing that there are 625,000 new sign-ups every day it has been suggested that Google+ could hit 400 million users by the end of 2012. To be honest, the idea seems a bit preposterous.
Sign-ups v active users
No doubt a lot of the “users” have come from people rushing to buy a new Galaxy Nexus – the flagship Android ICS device which includes the Google+ application and signs you up by default. But how many of these users will actually be active in a social context?
The current rate of increase in Android activations cannot continue forever and Google cannot rely on this solely for number generation, so we have to wonder when the market will hit saturation point.
I stated before that it is probably wrong to focus on the Google+ user numbers in the same way that we do with Twitter or Facebook as Google+ is designed to be as much as social layer and identity service as a social network. Rather than repeat myself ad nauseam I would recommend reading that post as the comments still hold true.
When theoretically every Google user is a potential Plus user Google don’t have any issues attracting raw numbers – the challenge is to encourage those people to use at least some of the social functionality on offer
Android users may have auto-upload turned on but unless they are fully educated in exactly what this does and how you then manage your photo albums online Google will just end up with a huge volume of pictures doing nothing but take up storage space. Also, if users do not see the benefit they will simply disable auto-upload in order to save on their monthly data allowances.
A working layer
As I have mentioned, the challenge is in fully developing the social layer so that people “use” Plus even when they are utilising another service and may not be fully aware that they are doing so.
We must keep returning to the quote “Google+ is Google”. Ultimately, the goal is that everything we do within the Google ecosystem will contribute to, or be influenced by Plus, in some way. They may have built the “Plus” and now need to build the Google part but it seems that the bulk of development is still with the Plus aspect rather than fleshing out the social layer.
There is currently one way traffic out of Plus with Google using the content we provide to modify search results in an aim to make them more relevant (a free crowd sourced filter) and all we have flowing in the other direction are items shared using the +1 button – hardly breaking any new ground yet.
Admittedly, Plus is only 6 months old (at least for those of us outside the Googleplex) but Google are making promises of the service that are so far-reaching in nature that they could take an exceptionally long time to see the light of day. Plus, therefore, runs the risk of being a casualty of its own hype if it takes too long for the layer functionality to fully materialise.
I have said previously that we “must allow the service to develop, improve and grow” and “afford it the opportunity to fulfill its potential” but our patience must not be tested.
Perception
Despite what Google have been saying we still have an issue with perception. They are quick to release the small changes but we need to start seeing the meat to flesh out the bones.
Why not discuss this post on Google+?
Image by stacyjclinton
A brief look back at the main at the main events in social during the last year as referenced here on my blog.
2011 has been a busy year for the social web with all the major players having something to bring to the table. The pace of change is increasing and will only continue doing so over the next 12 months but let’s have a quick glance at the main events:
Most notably we saw the launch of Google+ – the search giant’s last-ditch attempt to actually get social right after the false starts of Buzz, Wave and Orkut.
Going back as far as August last year I stated that Google had to get social incorporated into search in order to stay relevant – they finally came good in February.
Amidst rumours of either a full-blown social network (the google.me name did the rounds) or a social layer it seemed as though Google might cop-out and just enhance their search product but including recommendations from friends and the launch of the +1 button were merely precursors, laying down some of the foundations for what was to follow.
In reality Google+ is both a network and a social layer combined but it is early days and the latter element still needs a lot of work in order to be the game changer that it has potential to become.
It also surprises me that Google have not opted to wrap all links with the goo.gl URL shortener in order to gather even more stats but they seem to be doing well with the +1 button so maybe this isn’t needed.
2011 has seen a lot of change at Twitter from personnel changes and reports of staff unrest to the recent #newnewtwitter redesign.
The company has been on the defensive and fighting battles to regain control over its ecosystem to the point where it was virtually forced to buy TweetDeck to prevent UberMedia acquiring it and having too much power.
There have been calls for Twitter to extend beyond 140 characters and provide ever more complex functionality (I even proposed an idea for channels) but as I also said back in February:
“The joy of Twitter is in its simplicity and this is what resonates with the public.”
Twitter agreed and sought to simplify and unify the experience across all platforms with its latest look. While #newnewtwitter may not have been universally acclaimed – some even accuse it of just being a case of the emperor’s new clothes – it did at least unify the different points of access for the first time.
Identity
The launch of Google+ ignited a huge debate over the role of identity in the social web. Google’s insistence on a real name policy was a major flash point and led to what is known as the “nymwars” (from pseudonym).
There was a massive problem with the public perception of Google+ with many treating it as though it were just another social network but, due to the social layer, it is also an identity service. In order for Plus to be taken seriously as an identity service then there needed to be one key ingredient: trust. Without being able to trust a service there is no way people or third-party companies are going to recognize it, a rigidly enforced real names policy, therefore, became a necessary factor in establishing this.
Google has three levels of authentication: anonymous, pseudonymous and authenticated and the problem is that different apps across their stable employ these three levels with no cohesion or consistency. While Google had said that Plus will support pseudonymous authentication in future the hardest task Google will have in 2012 will be finding a way to successfully link Plus with the various other services via the social layer whilst retaining current levels of privacy – an undertaking of Herculean proportions.
After the launch of Google+ we started to see a number of changes which many argued were a response to the Google threat but nothing could have been further from the truth. While the timescale for some minor changes may have been brought forward they were, in fact, just setting the scene for the big ones to follow.
Changes to the news feed, the ticker, timelines and the extensions to the open graph are all massive undertakings and will have been in the planning stages for some time rather than cobbled together in response to any perceived threat from Google+.
Facebook has continued to push the boundaries with regards how far social can intrude on our lives and what we will share with others even though Frictionless sharing is not a sure-fire hit with everyone.
The problem Facebook has is also its strength. The company is very much the vision of Zuckerberg who knows exactly where he wants to travel on social path it’s just that a lot of us riding his bus wanted to be dropped off a couple of stops ago. Designing a product to achieve the goals of an individual is sometimes dangerous and can backfire when the public doesn’t agree. Still, perhaps it is better to push the envelope and make some mistakes than to not try at all; someone has to take a leap of faith for things to progress. At least Facebook, and Zuckerberg specifically, put their hands up and admit when they are wrong.
Location, location, location
This year saw the first steps in a transition away from the traditional check-in as the means to use location in social. Facebook announced it was moving away from the check-in and instead tying location into everything it does, every status update. Google+ allows for the same thing from the application on mobile.
A check-in on its own is very limited - location really provides value when it has additional context so enabling users to post updates with multiple types of information is now a must in order to succeed.
Facebook further signalled its intent with the talent acquisition of Gowalla (which is shutting down) in an attempt to utilise the synergies between the location startup and the new concept for Facebook Places.
The journey continues
I have already outlined a few ideas of what could happen in 2012 (perhaps they are more of a wish list than actual predictions) but, beyond staying the virtually obvious, it is almost impossible to predict what comes next in social as the rate of change is extraordinary.
As always, I look forward to the journey even if I don’t know where I’m going.
Why not discuss the original version of this post over at Google+
Image by jaxxon
Fine tuning the Google+ Stream aims to offer choice and flexibility but is it also an admission of failure?
The folks at Google+ think that any time is shipping time which is a great philosophy as it means new features can appear almost at will.
True to their word they have released a slew of new features for the holidays including the much touted fine-grained controls to manage your Stream.
Facebook manages your feed for you; it shows you what it thinks is important based, in part, on whose posts you interact with and the popularity of content such as multiple friends listening to the same song on Spotify.
Plus’ “Circle equalizer” lets us place a weighting on each of our Circles and is intended to put control in the hands of the user rather than the algorithm.
It has been suggested that organising our feeds using algorithms causes casual acquaintances – who may not interact frequently – to lose touch as their items are relegated within the feed; Google’s system of allowing us to assign a priority to each circle aims to solve this problem.
The argument is that you may not +1 or comment on all items from a particular group (such as family members) but you don’t want their posts to drift off into obscurity. A higher weighting on their Circle will ensure that those items will be prevalent in your stream.
Contradiction
Users have been clamouring for ways to organise and filter the Plus stream but does applying a weighting actually indicate that people aren’t using Circles correctly or, perhaps even, at all?
We were sold Circles as a revelation in online sharing and organisation: why have everyone lumped in together when you can easily divide them into groups by relationship, topic, location and then work with those groups accordingly.
Circles enable us to consume content from these specific groups and target them effectively so that the right content is shared with the right people. Don’t want to miss a post from a close friend or family member? Put them in a specific circle and view it on its own.
It is good to be able to manage your stream but, by enabling us to assign priorities to specific Circles, is Google admitting that people are only viewing their primary Stream? Have Circles not been the resounding success we expected?
Lists
Lists never caught on at Twitter and have now been virtually relegated to the feature graveyard. Facebook groups were also slow to gain traction, partly because they were tucked away within the depths of the interface, until their recent reinvention with smart lists.
Circles are designed as the ultimate list but – with Google needing users to populate Plus with content – the emphasis is very much on sharing rather than consumption.
Has our time spent on “linear” social networks caused us to become so conditioned to having a single timeline? Has the Circles experiment failed to convert us to thinking in groups?
Redundant?
Fine tuning the Stream has been universally praised but I can’t help but feel it flies contrary to the very reason Circles were employed.
If we are using our Circles as intended then the focus of stream organisation should surely be on filtering out that which we don’t want to see rather than trying to catch that which we do.
Why not discuss this post on Google+?
Image by Wysz
At this time of year many blogs like to make predictions for the year ahead. I’ve always resisted the urge (perhaps wisely) to do so in the past but this year thought I’d have a stab at it.
Some of my posts are already partly predictive in nature as I will, from time to time, outline what I think could/should happen with regards to certain services. Sometimes I’m right, sometimes I’m wide of the mark but, even when wrong, I believe the thought process and discussion the idea creates is just as valuable.
So let’s have a look:
I have already suggested that the new #discover tab will iterate relatively quickly in order to better facilitate the discovery of content and people – it is all an extension of “follow your interests” that was introduced with the last redesign, #newtwitter. So, where it is heading?
- Twitter is seeking to convert consumer into producers so must get them tweeting. The #discover tab is the ideal opportunity so will surely make it easier to respond to a “topic” rather than individual people or tweets. I envisage normal tweeting functionality (replies, retweets, etc.) Will appear more prominently on content within the #discover tab.
- Personalisation has been an increasing trend in 2011 and with Facebook continually tweaking their algorithms to display more relevant content in the news feed looks set to be here to stay. I do not doubt that Twitter will introduce behavioural analytics of their own so that #discover can filter information for us. We will, therefore, be provided with a selection of relevant content based on our interests as well as the “popular” items we already receive.
- Twitter keeps joining force with new partners (the latest being WordPress) to enable the display of external content inline within the stream. I suggest there is the possibility that #discover could evolve into a more Flipboard style UI containing embedded media (rather than just links) making “commenting” more obvious, instant and simple.
Google+
Google+ will obviously continue to slowly seep into all aspects of the Google ecosystem but in order to be taken seriously the “social layer” must get greater exposure and emphasis.
There must be a move to enable interaction in situ at the source service instead of needing to jump back to Plus. Comments will become bidirectional – syncing and appearing at both the source and the stream regardless of where they are made.
Only then will it be truly a social layer and not just a collection of, exceedingly functional, share buttons.
The social web
I can’t help but think that the social web will become less network dependent over the next year. The existence of tools like engag.io will take us away from relying on specific social networks per se - instead we will just connect to people regardless of where they are and what the method.
A perfect illustration of this in an early form is Apple’s iMessage: one application which chooses the most appropriate method of connection for the particular contact.
It is, perhaps, a bold statement but the “unified social inbox” will become a big part of how we work.
Over to you
What features do you feel will help to shape the social landscape in the next 12 months?
Why not discuss this post at Google+?
Image by shaza mahmoud1
Add the blog Page to your Circles:
For discussion and exclusive content.
