In the world of technology, where there are virtually no aspects of life that go untouched by its presence, there is an ever evolving and changing atmosphere of new communications tools. Among the most popular of these are social networking sites, whose primary goal it is to improve the way in which individuals communicate with each other and ultimately how business is done. From LinkedIn to Facebook to Twitter to Snapchat and Instagram, these sites continue to grow, evolve, and sometimes, falter.
Among the social networking sites that were released to public consumption is Google Plus. This social networking site, backed by the Google brand, had much promise in its inception and through its implementation. But, the site has seen mixed reviews and some question whether it is relevant at all. It has even been called a Ghost Town in comparison to what the other sites see.
Being less than as active as the creators would have wanted begs the question as to why this was the case. Why was Google Plus so disappointing, arguably, in its popularity? And, more importantly, does it still remain such a vacant place or is it beginning to evolve with the demands of the times?
History of the Platform
In order to understand the evolution of Google Plus, it is important to understand where it started. Google Plus was launched in June 2011 and was meant to stand out among the other popular networks of social interaction. This project was the brainchild of Vic Gundotra, head of Google’s social media initiative. Though he had been at the company for years, he was tasked with bringing about another revolution in popularity for Google that would embrace the social landscape that had become modern technology.
The social network was said to be different and wanted to stand out among the competitors. While Facebook and Twitter, for example, were focused mainly on social interaction as the foundation upon which the platforms were laid, Google Plus attempted a different approach. Rather than focus on the interactivity as its basis, it intertwined it into many different aspects of the service, pulling on the already prominent influence that Google had on the landscape of technology.
So, in layman’s terms, what does that mean? It means that Google Plus was meant to create interaction on top of the services that the internet powerhouse had already developed. For instance, interaction and sharing would be done through things like searches and through YouTube, etc. There would be an ease of sharing and communication that would be included in the activities that individuals already participated in. Google, essentially, wanted to capitalize on their popularity in technology and create a social networking platform within these compelling tools.
What Is Google Plus?
Google Plus is, as aforementioned, social networking layered on top of other Google services such as search and Gmail. It has several different features, attributes, and informational tools that strive to facilitate interactivity. Login is relatively simple and can be done from the google.com homepage, just as any other online account of this nature. A Google email is all that is necessary to create an account.
There are several different tools and attributes that Google Plus touts, including but not limited to, group messaging capabilities, easily formatted contacts that can be grouped into different categories for ease of quick communication, video chatting, and more. From an image standpoint, Google wanted to compete as well. Google Plus, which is downloadable to many different phones and gaming platforms, had essentially streaming photo lines. That is to say that a user could instantaneously sync their smartphone and mobile device photos directly onto their Google Plus account.
Why Was It Considered A Ghost Town?
Upon launch and four years later, there are new accounts being added to Google Plus daily, which may sound as if it is a complete and utter success. In its early days, there were millions of users that signed up in the initial days following the release of the social media platform. In time, though, these users seemed to be of a different variety or at least, differed in their behavior on this site in comparison with others in the same category. While the numbers alone may seem impressive and may make it seem like it is accomplishing what it was meant to do, Google Plus fell—and continues to fall—short of expectations. The following outlines more about how this assumption was made and about how user behavior is falling.
1. The Number of Users Is Incomplete
As of 2015, there over two billion profiles on the social network developed by Google. This is impressive, but, in fact, does not paint a complete picture of the activity of these users. A profile or account without activity is just that: an account. It is a number that represents nothing more than a placeholder and statistical lift, rather than a true representation of what is occurring on the network. For example, of the two billion, less than ten percent have actually posted something public. This means that while users are on the site, they are not actively participating and simply created an account.
This is a far cry from social networks like Facebook and Twitter, who have had upwards of a million posts daily. If Google Plus was aiming to compete, it is falling far short. Profiles are essentially remaining stagnant, a backdrop to the sometimes overly used other networks in the arena. Therefore, they are not fulfilling the overarching goal of its creator nor the Google franchise.
2. Staying Up to Date
One way that social media networks identify whether or not a user is active is by the changes that they make. While, aforementioned, users are not posting updates and sharing public content, there are other ways that this is calculated or studied. In this arena, too, Google Plus falls short.
Profile pictures are a great way to identify how active a user is. Of the most active accounts on Google Plus, pictures that depict who an individual is or what they stand for in the most simplified way have been changed very infrequently. At last estimate, just over five percent of users that fall into the more active of categories have actually changed this important part of a profile. As such, social media studiers suggest that Google Plus falls way behind the other networks of a similar nature and category, and one need look no further than Facebook to see a comparison as users frequently update their profile pictures and images with more than just a likeness. Rather, this profile page’s photograph is more like a political and social statement, again a great difference from Google Plus.
3. The Type of Activity
Looking once again at the most active of accounts on Google Plus—active defined as those pages that have actually posted something public or shared information—there is another staggering statistic that shows the lack of involvement of account holders. This statistic focuses on the type of activity that was publically shared. The top type of shared activity was a YouTube comment, of which roughly forty percent of active users made.
Why is commenting on a YouTube video problematic? At its foundation, it is not if this activity is part of a larger dialogue or social media conversation. Google Plus active users, however, are using this activity as the only type of activity that they participate in. Twitter, Instagram, and other social media sites see users commenting, sharing, and creating dialogue. This means that account holders that are considered active on Google Plus are active only in the loosest and most one-sided of ways.
4. Users Question the Motive
While Google Plus was released as a social layering tool, not even necessarily marketed as what it was meant to be—social media platform—many critics assert that it is nothing more than a fraud from the start. Some in the internet marketing and research world have suggested that Google Plus was a means to an end in that what it sought was a way to research the users that utilize Google search and other pages. That is to say that these critics believe that Google Plus was created as a way to understand and cater to searchers, weeding out the real searchers from the automated and studying human behavior.
Individuals that were technologically aware or in the know when it came to Google and its sometimes controversial researching methods, arguably, have asserted from the beginning that this network and layering tool was a way to study the guinea pigs that use their pages. It was a way to learn and gather information from the account holder, without directly stating that. A more active social media or social layering side would provide numerous data elements that could be used for advertisement placement, targeted promotions, and more. Though this, too, has never been directly supported by Google, the questionable practices of the past make it very possible and also have caught the awareness of those that are already focused on Google’s arguably bad data gathering techniques.
5. Invite Only Beginning
Another reason that many were deterred from creating an account and, potentially, becoming an active user of this site is because it was exclusive in the beginning. Prior to its full public release, Google Plus was an “Invite Only” site. As Facebook originally required a college email address, Google Plus required new users to be recruited by the original owners of accounts.
This in itself is not necessarily a bad marketing ploy. Invite Only appears exclusive and users like exclusive. But, the exclusivity did not result in the recruitment of active and engaged users. Rather, it resulted in accounts being created that remained un or underutilized. As such, the plan, then, essentially backfired and created exclusivity that became exclusionary. When it was public released for access, it appeared to be too little too late.
The Result
Google is beginning to take note of the problems that are occurring on its social media page, or at least seems to be backing down from the initial push and promotion of this account section. The boom with which it started and the buzz surrounding it was disappointing to both potential account holders, account holders, and, most importantly, Google itself.
As of 2015, Google was beginning to almost back away from its social media efforts and turn its focus elsewhere. While not publically admitting that it was less than ideal, the lack of interest and engagement among users appear to be why the entity is rethinking its approach. While no new plans seem to be publically expressed, there is a chance that Google is working behind the scenes to create a new social media page. It is also possible that—if truly a tool for gathering data—Google Plus is serving at least some sort of function in this arena and will not remain a top priority to the company.
Ghost Town Still
Based upon the numbers and the research described above, it is likely that Google Plus could still be dubbed a ghost town. There are accounts being created simply to stand still in the internet world where so much is possible. Though it has years to revamp its image and its goals with the page, it appears that, as noted above, that simply is not a priority. If efforts are not put in place to create a new recruitment tool or new marketing efforts are not implemented, the site will remain as inactive tomorrow as it was yesterday and continues today. Time will tell, though, if there are any changes to be made or if Google is changing course toward something more attainable, pressing, promotable, and useable. A technological presence as large as it is, though, it is possible that they will absorb the loss and consider the site a wash for now or, at least, let it remain unfilled and inactive until a later date.
About The Author
