We at ChurchMag love the concept of a social network like Google+ integrating into all of the different web apps that Google has to offer. We have talked about Google+ ad nausem, from who is using it to its minute facts and figures. In fact, this year they hit 100 million users faster than any other social network.
But even with all of this fun facts, it does not mean that Google+ has been a success.
RJMetrics did a study on the engagement of users on Google+ that reveals an unfortunate truth, they may have a lot of users registered, but they are not integrating into the online lives of people. Here is an excerpt from their blog post of the study:
Here are some of our most interesting findings:
- The average post has less than one +1, less than one reply, and less than one re-share.
- 30% of users who make a public post never make a second one. Even after making five public posts, there is a 15% chance that a user will not post publicly again.
- Among users who make publicly-viewable posts, there is an average of 12 days between each post
- A cohort analysis reveals that, after a member makes a public post, the average number of public posts they make in each subsequent month declines steadily. This trend is not improving in newer cohorts.
The question is how can they seem successful, but actually not be doing well? I have a few thoughts on that.
- People were curious. Google is great at the tease. Google+ was released to the right people, the geeks and nerds that absolutely wanted it. To get in, you had to have the invite and everyone wanted to be included. Google typically has great products, how are they going to make social media great? Well, they did create a great product, but Facebook already has a great one and it has felt a lot like Facebook since the two became social media competition. The product differentiation just is not there, why would I want to leave Facebook or Twitter for something that does not have the user capacity and community that I already have here?
- It was easily integratable, but boring. Google did a good job of making it only one click for current Google web app users to sign up and so probably most everyone did, but it was boring. Take a lesson from UNO. The original game was fun and no doubt has sold tons of decks of cards. The next logical step is to make another product with the UNO name. People were curious about the new games like UNO Flash and UNO Stacko, but the game just did not hold the same appeal… Facebook is amazing, Twitter has it’s own place too, but what does Google+ have for the average user that does not care about SEO techniques, +1ing everything, and Google+ Hangout?
- They are making it worth it…. slowly. For all of us nerds, you need to have a Google+ account that is tied into your blog, it impacts the Google search results with every +1 you get. At the same time, they do have things like Google+ Hangout that we love to geek out on and have integrated it into our businesses.
Maybe eventually the world will catch up, but for now, there are too many options and Google+ was too late to the game.
What do you think is the long-term future of Google+ compared to its competition?
Ken says
I couldn’t disagree more! I love google+ and have the best interactions there. Most of my posts are in limited circles so if you go to my profile you’ll only see some of the interactions but a majority of the fun stuff happens in my private circles.
I’ve found if I post similar content in G+ / FB / and twitter I get very different results. Twitter barely creates any interaction. Content on FB will get some “likes” but G+ is where all my real social media interaction goes. It’s all about cultivating circles based on interests. I post politics on FB and I get a couple of yawns or trolls. I post politics on my cultivated politics circle and they become day long conversations with lots of people chiming in.
I’ve grown to hate facebook and what’s worse is I’ve grown to dislike people I know IRL due to the endless stream of uninteresting vain banality on it. I can count the people I know IRL on G+ on one hand. I used to try to get my FB friends over to G+ until i realized they would just start posting about what they had for lunch and how they couldn’t wait for beer thirty to get here.
Also from a marketing point of view, Facebook makes all of its money on personal ads which a lot of people block. People trust peer review of product more than ads. So when you want to find a product to buy you don’t go into Facebook and use their search window to find the best prices on an item, you go to a Google search window and search for the product. The Google personal search results displaying what your peers think of an item is a game changer. Another draw back is at its very heart Facebook was created by a geek to met college girls and that mentality is implanted in Facebook very core… Google, Google plus and all of its appendages were created by businessmen looking to make a profit.
I believe there was a shift in paradigms between myspace and facebook. Myspace was all about people writing on your wall. Facebook was all about you writing on your own wall. Sadly in most cases no one is more interested in someone than themselves and that’s why IMHO you have the endless self promotion on facebook. What I find ironic is facebook lovers will always say stuff like “I don’t get twitter… who cares what someone had for breakfast” which always makes me raise an eyebrow at them as I think “wtf does this person think facebook is all about?
I do have to say that I really like the Google+ approach to people leaving you messages. They don’t go to your profile to post something, they instead go to their own profile and plus you into their wall, either to a limited audience or a shared audience . Think about the lowest common denominator in your facebook list… and think about them posting away on your wall while you are away for a week… their stupidity reflects on you since people are bound to think “ewww you are friends with that idiot?” … In google plus they can plus you all they want but it only shows up on their profile and the stupidity is a reflection on themselves and not you.
G+ FTW!
Jeremy Smith says
I have no problems with the actual product of G+, that is to not be disputed. But I am curious what you are disagreeing with? My interpretation of the facts is subject to disagreement, but you are disagreeing with the facts. Your personal situation may be different from the average person, but facts are unchangeable at that point in time, to deny them is to be foolish about the reality of G+. Instead, I would suggest that your experience in a niche section has proved profitable against the tide of lack of engagement that G+ is currently experiencing.
Jimmy says
I agree with the article. G+ has hangouts and SEO and I think they should leverage them more, but for the average user it is a ghost town. Whereas Facebook I see hundreds of posts per day, G+ I see 1 post every 2-3 days.
Dano Hart says
Just follow more people…that really really helps out. That’s what I suggest for new twitter users also.
Jeremy Smith says
Unfortunately, more people in your circle does not guarantee better engagement, only more noise. Engagement is communication whereas my experience of G+ has been people sharing information that is only one-directional.
Jeremy Smith says
Love the G+ hangouts and SEO too, but I agree that it is a ghost town.
Dustin W. Stout says
I’ve found that the only people who still claim Google+ to be a ghost town really haven’t experienced it at all. I can give you the names of 5 people to circle and you would think yourself foolish for ever thinking so.
Jeremy Smith says
But to assume that it will give you as much traffic and engagement as other networks is likewise foolish. I have no doubt that pockets of G+ are far superior. Take photography for instance. But several other people are too invested and being rewarded for it to switch. The cost of spreading resources thin is too great.
Tyler H says
It just seems like a more complicated rip off of facebook. I honestly would try to get more into it if people actually used it, but they don’t, so I’m not sure why I should invest my time into it. Plus, I feel like it is just like google wave and buzz, they’ll just shut it down one day and pop up with a new name like Google Storm or Google Social or something.
Tell me why I’m wrong so that I can hop on the bandwagon please.
Jeremy Smith says
Someone (CEO of Yahoo maybe?) said that G+ did a bad job of launching this by labeling it a social network, it really is just a platform to integrate all their tools. I agree that the similarities are there, but Google needs to focus on how G+ has all of the other goodies that go with it and less on the social media side of things.
Unfortunately… you are not wrong.
Isaac Taylor (@Isaac_Taylor) says
I know I already commented on the Google+ post of this article! I would say there is user engagement, but people are using G+ differently than Facebook (considering I could count on one thumb the number of people I actually know who’ve posted in the last week)…following blogs like CNET, ChurchMag and the like allows me to use G+ as an interactive kind of RSS reader, at least that’s kind of how it’s been for me.
Once Google get’s that API out…
Jeremy Smith says
I think G+ would rather see you use Google Reader for all your RSS needs
Sam Nguyen says
Why is Google+ button not on CNN, Time, or any news media web site?
Jeremy Smith says
Good point.
Rachel Blom says
I’ve tried Google+ for a while but nothing ever happened there. Few people were active and the ones who were just posted blog posts or links and there was little interaction. And I did spend a lot of time extending my circles and posting dedicated content and everything. I do like the hangout feature and I understand the possible power of the +1, but for that to actually make a difference, more people need to be active on it. For now I’ve decided that it’s a waste of my time as it yields little results…but I keep checking in with posts like these to see if anything has changed!
Jeremy Smith says
Beyond the G+ Hangouts and SEO perks, you really do not have anything to find yet…
Greg says
I prefer Google+ over FB or Twitter. Instead of the stream of drivel I see on FB, I see a lot of engagement on G+. BUT, it takes time to build those circles. I’m an amateur photographer and G+ is awesome for photographers and the different community and theme options available. I get so much more interaction from G+ than from all other platforms combined. Discussions are generally meatier and more well thought out as well.
Jeremy Smith says
I have also noticed a huge photography community and they are one group that is highly engaged. Do you see that niche as a very professional, hobbyist, or personal group that converses?
Dustin W. Stout says
Jeremy, brother– you’ve got some great insight and have wrote some awesome posts in the area of social media, but it seems Google+ analysis is not your forte. The facts used in this breakdown are sorely skewed and prey on peoples lack of knowledge. Really, I’d love to have a discussion about all the holes in the logic here, but I’m saving that for a blog post of my own. 😉
How many “Likes” does the average Facebook post have? Or how about shares? How many retweets does the average users Tweet get? How many followers does the average Twitter user have? (I’ll answer that for you, less than 100).
Nobody is asking those questions in order to compare apples to apples. Instead any bit of random (relevant or not) statistic or analysis that has the appearance of authority can be accepted so that people don’t have to change. People will do, say, or believe anything in order to stay comfortable.
C’mon man, you should know better!
Jeremy Smith says
The average user will not be switching to G+ anytime soon (next 6 months) and that is reason enough to not fully invest elsewhere. The facts presented above do show that little time is spent on G+. The possibility for a takeover is there, but they need to differentiate themselves more obviously to the casual user.