This week saw the launch of pages (as opposed to profiles) on Google+. Finally brands could have the place on the new social network platform they've been clamouring for. That's right, clamouring for. Google hadn't planned to incorporate brands this early, but the proliferation of brands acting as people on the platform has tipped their hand. For all those out there who've already dismissed G+, you might need to start paying attention as brands (and Facebook according to rumours) are taking it very seriously indeed.
I’ll come back to brands later, but let’s take a step back. What exactly is Google+ and what's it trying to do? (with many thanks to @Irina_Higginson for her excellent talk on this at work)
Google+ is a social networking platform where you can form connections with other people, and post and consume content. The shorthand commentators are using is to call it a new Facebook, but this has the unfortunate side effect of making everyone else expect the same features, and write off the platform almost immediatly. For my money, a better comparison is with Tumblr. Google+ is a micro blogging site, filling in the gap between Twitter and a full blog. But surely hat's Facebook I hear you say (yup, still with the Facebook Listen button). Well, not really. Sure Facebook includes photos in a better way than Twitter, but videos are clunky (quick tip, host videos on YouTube and then post a link to them on Facebook. That way you get a view count and the videos work on all mobile devices and tablets) and posts, while longer than Twitter, are still generally very short. What Google+ allows you to be is be very expressive but without having to write paragraphs of copy.
If there's one thing Google+ and Facebook do have in common it's aesthetic. Both are simple with plenty of white space, unlike Tumblr where custom design is a massive factor. It's in this area Google+ really comes up trumps. It's how Facebook used to be. Clean, elegant and extremely pared back. No ads. No long lists of sub menus. No ads. No ticker. Did I mention no ads? It's a clean slate. I'm hoping Google resist the urge to clutter it up over the coming months, caving in to all those demanding the exact same features as Facebook. The point is, it's not Facebook. I currently post the same thing to Twitter as to Facebook, as I don't see what extra Facebook gives me (except for photos, and I'd like to retain the copywriter on those myself thank you very much). Google+ is different. I'll admit most of my posts on it so far have been about the platform itself, but the ability to turn out mini blog posts very quickly and easily greatly appeals. As much as I like writing these I find I hard to summon up the enthusiasm to post a similarly long piece on the new Nook but it certainly warrants a paragraph of thought (I don't know much about it, but I strugg le to see how it's going to be a contender to the iPad in the way I think the Kindle Fire is, without an ecosystem the size of iTunes or Amazon to back it up).
Another major area of strength for G+ is circles, where you are *forced* to place each contact in at least one named group (a "circle"). Whenever you post, you say which circle(s) can see it. Yes Facebook has lists, but for a start almost nobody uses them, and even if you do it displays the name of the list when you post (Google keeps circle names private) which could lead to some embarrassment if you named lists "real friends" and "not really friends". By making circles compulsory, google is putting privacy control at the heart of the platform, forcing you to take control, the polar opposite to Facebook.
There are lots of other nice features (particularly huddles, a group video chat service) but they aren't the main reasons people will sign up to Google+. It's the freedom of posting, the control of privacy, and the feeling of starting afresh that’s going I drawn them in.
Oh, and one more thing. Let’s go back to brands. With brands on G+ you don't have to worry if your friends aren't signed up yet as there's about to be a plethora of content (and likely offers) heading your way. Whether this influx of content buries the posts from the few friends you do have on the platform (yes, sign up has been great but posting hasn't been) remains to be seen, but at least it's real content, something G+ has been sorely lacking.
Should brands be on Google+? Well for most major ones they already are, as anyone can create and name a fan page. Yes Google are going to verify pages (they've already done this for Pepsi) but without a genuine Coca-Cola page the fan ones will run riot (as happened with Facebook but fortunately turned out okay) and consumers will get confusing and misleading messages. Yes G+ doesn't have apps. Yes it doesn't have in depth analytics. Yes there are several page admin issues to sort out (Google are aware of these). But, these factors all apply to Twitter and it’s not stopped brands embracing that.
Whether you’re a person or a brand, Google+ offers you a new way to connect with others in a richer way than Twitter but a simpler, cleaner way than Facebook. I'm looking forward to seeing how it grows and evolves over time, and, yes, posting to it.
Let's just not mention Buzz and Wave.
