Ever since the release of Google+, I’ve been thinking through what Google had to go through to match and improve on Facebook. People think that geekery is all about code but there is serious intellectual work that precedes the code that is just as hard. Google had to figure out what they did wrong with Buzz (as I explained) but also figure out what is actually wrong with Facebook, if there is such a thing. Whatever it was that they figured out, they put their finger on something because Google plus already has 20 million users. Not bad for a limited, 3-week rollout.
Ok, so here’s what I’m thinking. Imagine if we had a culture and society that worked the following way. You are walking along the street. A person walks up to you and says: “hey, will you be my friend?” You are now in an odd position. If you say no, you hurt the person’s feelings. If you say yes, you have a new friend you don’t really know, and you thereby take the risk that this person is going to know too much about you or otherwise lurk and bother you. If you object, the new friend can point out that you once agreed to the deal.
Just imagine if this sort of thing went on constantly throughout the day. Everywhere you went, people came up and asked the same question: “will you be my friend?” We would all be going out of our minds. There is a reason that this doesn’t happen. No one wants a world like that. Friendship is a mutual moving together toward each other, and each friendship is a unique sort of thing. There are subtleties involved.
Facebook works much like this icky world that no one really wants. We don’t hate strangers but neither do we want to be forced to give strangers a yes or no answer as to whether we want to be their friends – friends in that homogeneous, in-or-out Facebook way. It is a particular problem for people who have lots of associations (family, coworkers, etc.) that are not necessarily ones we actively choose every day but we would all be loath to end on grounds that doing so leads to hurt feelings.
This accounts for the universal nightmare of all people under a certain age: suddenly receiving a friend request from Mom or Dad. You can’t win with this deal because Mom and Dad are usually newbies to Facebook and therefore only have a few friends. If they become your friend, they are in a position to suddenly obsess about every image, every comment, every like, every other friend. They will be up all evening hitting the refresh button on your page. This is really terrible.
Facebook has developed its own internal culture and some software tricks for dealing with this problem. But it remains a fundamental problem. And surely every software problem has a coding solution. Google+ figured it out. You have a public profile. That’s your choice. Anyone can follow that public profile. Now you are in a position to add them or not to any circle of your own creation. This makes incredible sense. At first, many people were alarmed to discover that Google permits people to follow you without your permission, but this is why. I mean, in real life, anyone is in a position to “follow” you too, that is be curious about who you are and what you are doing. But it is up to you to take that next step and add them to some social circle of your own creation.
This also solves the Mom and Dad problem too. They will never know if they are in one of your circles or not. You could post to your circles every few minutes all day and night and they would never know this and, crucially, they would never know that they are being excluded from anything. More rationally, you simply create a circle called “Mom and Dad” and post to that one all that you want them to see. “I love my calculus class so much! Thank you Mom and Dad for making this possible!”
In other words, Google+ found the thing about Facebook that distorts human associations and created a platform that more closely impersonates human social relations. To me, this is absolutely brilliant.
{ 25 comments }
Innovation builds on what others have already done. There is nothing in Google+ that facebook can’t replicate.
http://www.viewfromthepeak.net/2011/07/09/1-for-google/
Facebook does have a disadvantage in that all their current users are used to how it works, and all their settings and data implicitly use the current model. Switching models would upset this and probably not go as cleanly as if they started fresh as Google has been able to do. Of course, down the line Google will be in the same position, as people are used to the G+ interface and new ideas that obsolete that model come along.
There was nothing in Facebook that MySpace couldn’t replicate.
There was nothing in Myspace that Yahoo groups couldn’t replicate.
Well, I have no idea, but LOL anyways.
There is nothing in G+ that real life doesn’t already do.
real life? what is the url for that?
There is also the method of invitation – invitation only – that may have played a part in its jump to popularity. People know the quality of products Google can supply, and having to actually look for a way to join this ‘exclusive club’ to even try it out can’t but pique their curiosity.
But of course, the big change in reflecting how social networks actually work is Google’s big advantage now. Meanwhile, Facebook did quite a few things to annoy its users, especially where privacy is concerned… let’s see how this plays out!
I had this idea years ago. Haha. I mean I don’t know anything about website design and hats off to google for implementing it.. but a part of me feels sad when a company uses an idea I had.
Not to say I believe I owned that idea and therefore nobody else should be allowed to use it, however o;)
Yes, and I invented post-it notes
So far it has 44 likes on facebook. It is high time you added the +1 button.
That is what is so great about Google+ and Circles. The ideas are so simple and elegant you are immediately amazed that you didn’t think of them. And that’s why Google is worth billions.
Very interesting post. Also quite interesting that the Mises Institute profile on G+ no longer exists.
wow, that’s bizarre!
oh! they deleted all organization profiles pending a new app just for organizations. We were warned!
“I mean, in real life, anyone is in a position to “follow” you too, that is be curious about who you are and what you are doing. But it is up to you to take that next step and add them to some social circle of your own creation.”
And it is up to the internet to record your public persona for posterity – that is definitely a departure from real life. Real life people tend to forgive and forget, but the internet never forgets.
I truly don’t understand this insistence on pushing Google+ to the point of manufacturing non-existent issues with Facebook. As I explained, Facebook does—and has for quite some time—allow the creation of groups, each with specific permissions, and the ability to move friends between them at will. To say that it cannot is simply false and to claim that doing so requires “software tricks” is misleading at least, if not downright dishonest.
While I don’t exactly know what qualifies as a “software trick” in the author’s view, most users and certainly all programmers would call the ability to easily create groups and move people between them as part of the website’s native ability that comes with having an account, a “function”.
There is virtually nothing mentioned in this post or the corresponding article that G+ can do that Facebook cannot.
Not following you here. If someone sends you a friend request, you can accept it and easily create a wall that only this one person will see? And when you post to your wall, you can easily select who among your friends is going to see this?
You cannot create a separate wall for every group, (which, if I am not mistaken, you cannot do with G+ either) but yes, in Facebook you can easily select for every post you make, who among your friends will see it. It is a function that has been available for at least a year, possibly two.
“You are now in an odd position. If you say no, you hurt the person’s feelings.” You know, you could just say, you are pretty awesome, but I just want to be left alone for sometime…
The concept is basic to the UNIX Security Model. Maybe that is why Linux runs most web servers.
lets see if Facebook can become a “natural monopoly” as its hypers say it inevitably will or google can stop it. I have my google plus account but I see no movement there, yet.
Okay, now the institute will have to start supporting it with add ins for Google+ and more in that format. I do like it better than FB.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Google tried to get a patent or copyright protection for “virtual acquaintanceship”…
When it comes to Spookle and Spookbook, is there even a reasonable choice other than none of the above?
Generating compelling content and interactions on the Facebook page is the obvious way to entice Facebook users to turn into a fan of your webpage. The goal should be to turn away from the frequent monologue of mainstream marketing and turn towards developing a dialogue with customers.
Comments on this entry are closed.