Join us for the premier social media, marketing, and communications event, brought to you for a second year by SMT. Buy your pass now!
Post your event here and we'll share it with our community. If one of our members is featured, we'll promote as well on their profile.>
Your resource for exclusive content and insights from Social Media Today, and opportunities to reach our community of professionals.
The Social Business Book Club brings you books, discussions, and insights from today's to business thought leaders.
Join interactive talks and and panel discussions with leading thinkers and practitioners on social media and networked business, or browse the catalogue of recorded sessions - all completely free.
Reach Social Media Today's community of marketing and communications professionals in an editor-approved context with a native advertising package.
Deidre Woollard has written for AOL.com, HuffingtonPost.com, Realtor.com, JustLuxe.com, Pursuitist.com and more. She teaches in the University of California Irvine Extension Digital Journalism Program.
Hi John. Thanks for the comment! I'm not sure if the whole idea was doomed from the start but I definitely agree that the brand will survive as something other than they wish/aspire to be. I think the brand was in quicksand before Johnson arrived, the rescue attempt failed, and the ensuing flailing has definitely hastened the descent. I'm curious who the core fan base is and what they want. I feel like the brand doesn't know its own customers.
Good points. The thing about the filter bubble that always frustrates me is how much time/energy it takes to break it and how that has to be done over and over in terms of clearing browser history, etc.. Every search, every click, every like and all the activity of everyone you interact with makes it deeper and thicker, shutting out more of the world.
I think one thing we will see with graph searches is that people will pay more attention to what they like or recommend. Already people are unliking things they may have liked in the past on Facebook simply to prevent them from appearing on friends feeds as sponsored ads. I know Zuckerberg has said he sees Facebook as a personal newspaper but it can never be that as long as your activity and interactions are broadcast to others in order to sell things. Reading or even interacting with something isn't always an endorsement and graph searches don't necessarily make that distinction. In a world of all likes (or all pluses), there's only a yes vote...
Great post. I've been thinking a lot about this too and what it says for the social space. I think social networks, Google Plus, Facebook et al. want to be able to throttle feeds so that people must pay for access. The tricky part has always been monetizing RSS. The feeders themselves don't make much money and the sites don't benefit unless they have ads running in their RSS because otherwise the RSS siphons eyes away from the site and its advertising. I'm curious to see what comes next as well. I think this also says something larger about the fact that most people don't feel the need to have all the posts from a particular site...
There's so much I like about G+ in terms of the interface but there's also some stuff I don't like including the trending posts (I was much happier once I turned that off). The biggest problem I see is that there is still a lack of strong participation. I know so many people who use/love Gmail but live on Facebook. Does it make sense? Nope. But until that tide turns G+ will be an also-ran.
While #5 the higher ranking in Google search is great for businesses, I have noticed that my searches on Google are getting increasingly compromised by my own +1s and the +1s of those in my circle. Sometimes I have to log out or use a different browser to break the filter bubble and get to the deeper content.