I wonder how many bloggers and journalists are eating crow this week after GlobalWebIndex released its GWI.8 (Q4 2012) study? The big story to come out of the report's findings is that while Twitter, the current darling of social media networks, continues to attract active users, Google+ surpassed it to claim the number 2 position in social networks based on active monthly users around the globe.
After the network's impressive launch -- powered by a limited access, "invite-only" sneak peak by savvy Internet users -- and the quick-to-market release of books and webinars by popular authors such as Jason Falls and Guy Kawaski espousing the virtues of the network, the media largely panned Google+ as a social media ghost town. Yes, Facebook remains the juggernaut of the social media networks, claiming 50 percent of global internet users each month but Google+ has grown by 27 percent this past month with 343 million users globally.
Savvy marketers have been making the case for an increased business presence and engagement on Google+; the most common argument is the social network's growing impact on Google's search engine ranking. Those fueling the Google+ for SEO benefit discussions make a good point. It's critical for websites to appear on Page 1 of Google, especially in one of the top three organic positions, as these spots receive 58.4 percent of all clicks from users, according to a new study from Optify.
Ignore At Your Own Risk
For the most part, however, their recommendations seem to have been ignored. I suspect the fact that YouTube (which GlobalWebIndex just started to track as a social network) came in at the number 3 position with over 20 percent of the global audience engaged on the site monthly, will finally capture the attention of business and marketing executives.
Google, through its various Web properties and deep integration with web- and social-based apps, is creating an interconnected database of users, content and relationships. This convergence of people, data and context is being referred to as the Web's trust-based network. Google search engine results will be reprioritized to more favorably rank content that has been +1'ed or shared using the Google share/like widget or created and/or shared by people in one of your Google+ circles. Of course, this presentation filter only works when you are searching Google.com while logged in to Google, but let's face it, with the growing number of applications and Web properties they control, the number of people permanently logged in is increasing exponentially every month. The goal of a search engine is to provide the most relevant information based on search queries and it now considers your social relationships a highly relevant factor in determining just what information is relevant to you.
Google+ : Social Proof or Social Influence?
Statistics have shown that consumers trust the recommendation of other consumers over a business' advertisements. By extension, a consumer is more likely to trust the recommendation of a person they communicate and agree with frequently, as measured by the volume and nature of their social engagements.
Further, in our socially-connected world, the personalization of search results drives greater social proof around a business brand. Social proof is the public consensus around an idea, opinion or mode of behavior that consumers look for when attempting to make a decision they're conflicted with, such as "Should I believe this?" and "Should I buy this?"
I suspect the opportunity for marketers will be even greater in the upcoming year. Consider how prioritizing search results based on social relationships will impact the growing trend around influence marketing. Social influence scoring platforms have come under heavy criticism for not taking into account the nature of the relationship between the influencer and his/her audience. Has Google inadvertently (or by design?) stumbled upon a solution to this challenge?
Analyzing the subject matter, sentiment and context of discussions across social channels like Twitter or Instagram is difficult because of the format limitations (140 characters, images vs. text, limited profile information, etc.). However, Google+ provides members the opportunity to expand on their conversation with more words and, when connected to other Google-synced solutions, can provide the context missing in most of the current social scoring tools.
Opportunity Is Knocking
There is an immense opportunity for marketers as Google's services are further connected through the G+ social layer. Google has advanced the definition of what "being connected" is today and it's using that relationship algorithm to stream more relevant data to each of us. Therein lies a golden opportunity for product managers seeking to influence consumers. Marketers would be well advised to focus on the recommendations created and shared within Google+ more than the other networks. That content is more likely to generate social proof from those more closely linked to the consumer and higher on Google's search engine.
Have you been ignoring Google+? Share your thoughts on the recent announcement of Google+ and YouTube's global popularity and what impact it will have on you -- if any.
Follow Sam Fiorella on Twitter: www.twitter.com/samfiorella
Open yourself to the possibility that there really is something to this Google+ thing.
1. Create an account on G+ and fully fill it out with your picture, and info about yourself so people can get a sense of who you are.
2. Post interesting and unique information about stuff that interests you.
3. Circle a few hundred people that talk about topics that interest you. (you can find them in Google+ Communities and Shared Circles).
4. Engage with the people in your circles. Comment, +1, and reshare.
Do that every day for 30 days and decide if Google+ is worth it.
From the very beginning, Google Inc. has been distorting data in order exaggerate google+ active counts.
The more Google Inc. use this underhanded tactic, the more it will backfire on the company's image.
In fact, a recent survey shows that consumers now trust Microsoft MORE than Google, Inc.
http://www.winbeta.org/news/microsoft-makes-ponemons-list-top-20-most-trusted-companies-privacy
As a side note, Twitter counts users that are really bots and not people. Facebook counts access from their social plug-ins, etc. So on that front, they're all in the same boat in my opinion.
Lots of marketers still cling to the To Big To Fail concept for Facebook; I think they're dead wrong.
Yes, pretty much exactly why tech veterans started dumping all of Google's services when it revised its privacy policies to be friendly to this instead of users.
However, now that G+ has been around for a little while, it is starting to mature. It's not just techies anymore, though there are still quite a few of them also. Take a look at the communities. There are some great conversations going on.
I would like to see "active Google+ users"... as in, participating and sharing on the platform itself, not just using one of Google's many products.
Aside from that, they seemed to be "forcing" some use of the platform in the early stages (I'm one of the early users myself).
So "eating crow"? Nope... I don't think so. ;)
Overall, Google+ IS a nicely designed and I do recommend it... but I don't think they have gotten the "number of users" monkey off of their back yet.
http://googleblog.blogspot.nl/2012/12/google-communities-and-photos.html
these numbers have definitely gone up since the communities feature was introduced. there is no doubt that google+ is growing exponentially just like facebook did from 2008-2011
If social networks engender a new social philosophy, then the G+ system somewhat goes against it. You're absolutely right: ignore at your own peril. It is a powerful support to SEO and genuinely makes a difference. But, if you know you "must" join to ensure your SEO is strong, then inherently the "you have to join" completely goes against the value of a social network. It takes away the authenticity. You do it for numbers. Whereas the social philosophy suggests that you do it for people.
The fact that G+ is growing quickly and has surpassed other "social networks" - in my opinion - is because folks have realized the value to SEO, which leads to increased qualified visits to your website (you hope), which leads to conversions. Twitter, Facebook and others are difficult to measure from a conversion standpoint; so naturally anyone in business will want to find a way to measure this magical world of "social". G+ gives us that opportunity.
Thanks for the post, Sam.
Facebook started as a way to "get and rate chicks" and it's evolved into the largest social network out there. Other networks such as Twitter are not used for SEO ranking but its conversations are certainly skewed for business purposes (marketing/selling) and influence marketing (social scores). Is there a difference?
I don't have family relationships on Google+ (but I suspect that is changing). I know *regularly* have business meeting using Hangouts instead of Skype, GoToMeeting or others. My son is off to college soon and we've already discussed using Google+ and Hangouts to communicate while he's away.
Google is Google. It "does no evil", but, it will have its way.
Did you go out of your way to sign up for Google+, or were you badgered by Google into joining?
You have gmail? You get Google+.
I'm there because I get that Google controls SEO and rewards Google+ users with rank.
Google certainly knows how to herd its users. Yet, it still doesn't seem to get "social" or how to achieve a positive, seamless social #ux.
In short, no need for Google+ users to eat crow - though a little bit of "humble pie" just might help Google+.
Thanks!
@GlenGilmore
Yes, Google does know how to herd its users but I disagree with your comment about it not knowing how to achieve a positive, seamless social UX. Can it improve? Sure. But the fact that I don't have to log in or open Google+ to access my messages, view comments, add comments to share, for example, is a seamless and effective UX. Using the click 'n drag feature to group and categorize my friends and contact is also a great design/user experience. The recent communities addition has been a very positive experience for me.
The fact that we'll all be praying at the Church of Google one day soon worries me a bit but I can't fault them for their efforts to create a seamless social experience. Certainly better experience that Facebook.
Note: HuffPost does have a Google+ page. https://plus.google.com/+huffingtonpost/posts
According to the original article, "active users" as those who "used" or contributed to a site in the past month.
The problem is that a person who uses "Google Search" or "You Tube" is considered as "using" Google+, even if the person never posted or even log on Google+ website.
This makes it impossible to compare Google+ and Facebook active usage.
Unfortunately, this is Google, Inc. sneaky way of inflating their Google+ numbers. You CANNOT trusts Google+ numbers.
IF it is true that Google+ active users is 50% of Facebook, then CEO LARRY PAGE would have announced it during the earning conference call this past week. But there was not a single mention of Google+ in his conference call.
It is also incredible that this "fact" was made public by unknown BRITISH marketing firm. You would have thought Google would be the one making the press release.
Bottom line -- you CANNOT trust numbers from Google+.
The CHART is MISLEADING -- it is comparing Apples and Oranges.
Google Inc has a history of DISTORTING AND EXAGGERATING numbers to inflate their actual results.
If that's the case, I'll count my switching on my computer as active use of the web, whether I open a browser or not...
However, I'm not sure that your point makes a difference. Here's why: I don't have to log in to Google+ to check my friends status, add comments, +1 articles, add pictures, etc. I can do that from my Google+ home page, My Google RSS reader or my YouTube Page. Does that mean that I'm NOT engaging on Google+? No. I can share this article via a Tweet on Twitter without having to open the Twitter web page. Does that mean the tweet wasn't shared or that I didn't tweet it?
The web and the social experience is becoming a seamless experience across different platforms and devices. The end result is what we're talking about here - the social proof that is created by Google's brilliant (albeit sneaky) integration across platforms.
these pundits were dead wrong. and they were paid to be dead wrong (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/12/facebook-google-pr_n_861165.html)
I would agree that he Pundits who wrote Google+ off, were a bit to quick on the trigger.