Jump to content

Why do people mock Google+ so much?


G+_Stephen Styffe
 Share

Recommended Posts

Why do people mock Google+ so much?

 

On TWiT yesterday, I heard Leo and the panel mocking Google+. They were suggesting that G+ is for white, male tech enthusiasts and for no one else. They did recognize that good conversations go on here, but they still mock it. I've always wondered why that is.

 

Facebook is obviously not a good platform for tech enthusiasts to interact. (For numerous reasons not worth stating here.) Twitter is a very large and obvious choice for many, but why? Why is Twitter inherently better than G+ for tech enthusiasts. Twitter is a limited platform, which has now become more like a dictatorship, closer to Facebook than to any other service, with their recent API changes and screwing off third-party devs. Twitter is good for ciphering through news and holding 140 character conversations, but that's it! 

 

The way I see it, Google+ is the best network to conduct real conversations with people, and most definitely by far the best place to share photos now. Especially since Yahoo has practically given up on Flickr. Google+ offers a variety of unique ways to allow people to personalize their news feeds and become selective about what they see and hear (for better or worse) and I think that's very attractive to people like me. Google+ may be an elitist service, but it shouldn't be. Because I think that Google+ is honestly better than Facebook and Twitter and if people gave it a chance, maybe they wouldn't hate on it.

 

What are your thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that G+ is highly underappreciated. Personally, I don't use Facebook very much as I have very little interest in most of the mundane conversions that take place there. I only leave the account open so that I can keep in touch with family members and a few of my high school classmates. I honestly don't want G+ to be like Facebook...G+ is my escape FROM facebook. I come here to get relevant news and information from people that think like me; Facebook doesn't do that for me. Oh, and I'm neither a man nor white ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dawnetta Charmaine , your post was terrific!  I was going to comment with support for  Steven Styffe , but your post took the words out of my mouth.  As James Taurasi  said, we're really glad to have you and  Kristy-Ann MacPherson  and other ladies here.  

 

I'm a tech enthusiast but also an avid gardener and the G+ gardening community is largely comprised of women.  Laporte is totally off-base with his G+ bashing.  I'm beginning to wonder why 14,000 of us are following TWIT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think G+ is getting there, but I can understand why Leo Laporte  is hesitant to make an investment of time and effort into it.  It's been slow to gain traction and Google's social history has been underwhelming.  

The truth is, I see great comments and conversation in G+ threads.  Not the crap comments like on YouTube, or the inane "likes" on Facebook.  

Google controls internet search,video and email - I'm pretty sure they can get this social thing to stick eventually.  I'm seeing more and more activity every month.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back in the day, TWiT did a lot for me. Then Leo setup the TWiT army online with our own little subTWiT domain, which he participated in for a while. It eventually lost his support, and he then took it offline. It is thanks to that small (part of the) community that has helped me even more to embrace my love of technology when so many others were all "eh but you're a girl.. women don't care about technology and things like that!" And then the quality, at least to me, of TWiT degraded enough pre-move from the cottage that I gave up regular viewing. I still swing by to catch up on TWiT every now and again, but it doesn't seem worthwhile. The community, for the most part, seems of greater value to me. And that alone, is why I stick around.

 

I'm glad to be here, too. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TWIT is all about "male tech enthusiasts". You would think that TWIT would welcome G+ as a perfect place to attract new viewers.

 

I have been listening to TWIT shows for many, many years. Leo Laporte is not the expert in the room, but more the guiding force. He is easily persuaded and finds himself in constant contradictions because of this characteristic. I do NOT see this as a fault, but merely his personality and MO. Listen to the cohost and you will find yourself much more satisfied. Better yet, let the shows be an influence and not the truth. This is most likely the reason why I have never found his radio show all that appealing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some random thoughts on the use of Google+: I agree with everyone here in that the more you actively participate in Google+ the more useful it becomes.

 

I decided a wee while ago to not follow people who only use social networks as links to their other sites. That usually manifests in Google+ posts that only link to their latest blog posts and articles, and then the OP never appears in the comment section. So I was disappointed that the only use the panel agreed upon for Google+ was to help their SEO. A vast majority of the people on here are not promoting anything, they just would like to discuss topics they find interesting or important, and if they can do that with the actual people involved (in this case the tech journalists who can help expand on and clarify their point of view), so much the better.

 

As for TWiT and Leo, I do understand that everyone has a job to do, and they can't host a show, and then discuss it for a couple of hours afterwards. Anyway, the chatroom is much more valuable for immediate discussion with the panel.

 

So after this meandering comment, where does that leave us. Well, if TWiT wants to actively ignore Google+, it's really not a problem. Let's put this 'Leo doesn't use Google+' topic to one side, he said he finds no use in it, we do not need to convince him otherwise.

 

(tl;dr) Let's carry on discussing tech and TWiT, and Google+ is a perfect forum for that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By definition, you only see on Google+ what you choose to see.

 

I see mostly tech stuff because that's what I've added most. But I also see photographers, artists, writers, and lots of "plain Joes" and "plain Janes" who are just your average every day people.

 

If you just watch Trending on Google+ you can see that tech interest spikes, but "mundane" topics are almost constant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree James Hollenbeck  I like Leo didn't give it much of a chance. 

But meanwhile, this post was interesting because it proved that G+ is not a "ghost town" or only a place for "white, male techies". We just proved Leo wrong through this conversation. It's very interesting to see how sometimes Leo's perception of things can be skewed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeffery Edmonds  I agree with you that saying it is a ghost town isn't exactly what they mean. However, how many times have we heard that the TWiT network is a 'niche' community. That the people who watch, and the audience they are courting, are tech enthusiasts. That TWiT doesn't always appeal to the 'normals'*. Ignoring the niche market you are trying to serve doesn't make sense.

 

Alexa Krueger That is a very good point, relating to you get out of G+ what you put in. My guess is that nearly everyone who follows Leo will be tech orientated in some way, skewing the type of conversations he has. This also brings up the point that Leo is looking at G+ from a 'how can I get more page views/listeners/etc' viewpoint. A one-way street. There is so much benefit to searching for people/communites with your interests - whatever they may be - and participating in their discussions. Leo always mentions his photographers and tech journalists circles and wonders why G+ is only filled with these kind of people. I have a feeling you have hit the nail on the head.

 

*I hate this term, but in discussing it it will bring out further rants on how I feel the tech press are revelling in the use of this term, and are becoming more insular, and almost less relevant...but that is a topic for another day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damian Mongru I agree they are pretty foolish to ignore the very demographic they cater too. None of my friends are on Google+ but that was the same with Facebook and twitter. The tech community are the early adopters and then things gravitate towards the generally public.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have exactly two real-life friends on G+ and they are just signed up, they don't actually use it.  Of course, if masses of regular people did start to migrate to G+ then all the tech people would consider it "over" and go elsewhere and it wouldn't be very interesting anymore.  Can't win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...