

Google+ accounted for 35% of Tweeted news links last week - tilt
http://thenextweb.com/google/2011/07/08/google-accounted-for-35-of-tweeted-news-links-last-week/

======
chrstphrwrght
I'm interested to hear how much penetration G+ has had amongst everyone's
social groups.

Personally I just have one circle right now made up of work friends. They're
all pretty technical; about 60% of them were on both my Facebook and Twitter,
and the other 40% were just on Facebook. I was looking forward to using a
social tool where I could share and hear more from that other 40%, but they
haven't been posting much at all. My reasoning is that if they were big
sharers they'd probably already be on Twitter.

My friends who aren't in web or game development have shown no interest in G+
though. I feel like the tool's purpose is to connect with people that I know
in real life, so I'm less likely to connect with random but interesting people
like on Twitter.

As a result of all this I don't get a lot of updates on G+, and those people
who are posting seem to be doing it out of hope that it'll encourage use of
the service - they're getting more engagement on Twitter.

Early days and all that jazz, I'm just curious to see if it's taken off for
anyone yet.

~~~
seri
I feel Google's strategy is indecisive, thus leads to you and I's confusion
about the tool's purpose. I feel G+ produces the features of a more private
Facebook (by directly implementing Paul Adam's model that matches more closely
to the real life social graph), but advocates the use of an advanced Twitter
(by inviting famous folks in for people to follow) and effectively builds the
social graph top-down rather than bottom-up as in Facebook's case.

Pundits have already speculated that social networks aren't supposed to grow
top-down, and G+ will ultimately fail
([http://www.techjournalsouth.com/2011/07/why-google-will-
fail...](http://www.techjournalsouth.com/2011/07/why-google-will-fail-social-
networks-grow-like-trees-not-on-them/)). Then again Google has always detested
doing something too manually, especially when it involves human beings.

------
djm
I think this says as much about twitters user base as it goes about g+.

~~~
yaix
My first thought.

"Twitter's largest user group still SEO/SEM people" would have been a fitting
title too.

------
mark_l_watson
I have always found Twitter to be very useful, getting a lot of great links
and news items from people I follow. That said yesterday I never visited
Twitter until late in the evening. I was using G+ yesterday instead.

I find little value in Facebook but family members and some friends really use
it a lot.

I hope that Twitter, Google+, and Facebook all do well because they serve
different people's needs (or wants) and all three are platforms for
developers, basically the ocean a lot of us live in.

------
rphlx
From the twitter spritzer feed, only ~0.05-0.10% of tweets contained
"Google+". So the headline seems a little fishy to me, although of course not
all tweets contain a "Tweeted news link".

------
palguay
I wonder at what point google will kill orkut and move over all the users and
their connections to G+ that will add a few million users

------
aveffects
I have Zero friends from facebook on Google+ but then it took them all well
over a year to gather on facebook so i don't expect any of then to port over
to Google+ I don't have tech savy friends

------
MikeCapone
Yes, but how much of G+ posts were about G+ itself, and does Douglas
Hofstadter have an account yet to enjoy that situation?

~~~
humbledrone
I think you misinterpreted the headline/article. When it says "Tweets" it
means "On Twitter" (i.e. "Tweet" has not become a generic term for sharing a
link regardless of platform). So it's saying that 35% of the news links posted
to twitter.com had to do with Google+.

~~~
seri
If I understood him right, I think he means while news about G+ is all over
Twitter and in fact, everywhere, the other side of the coin is that even on
G+, all you see is discussion about G+ itself. In other words, G+ is still in
the buzzy meta phase. Only when people on G+ stop talking G+ that things start
to mean something.

~~~
MikeCapone
Indeed, and I thought Douglas H. would get a kick of something that talks
about itself (see his book Godel, Escher, Bach for a ton of recursive
stuff...).

------
jsavimbi
It also account for 99.8% of Google+ posts this past week. The other 0.2% were
people changing their profile pics.

------
bonch
Twitter? Hell, look at Hacker News' constant stream of Google+ submissions.
It's just like when Wave came out. You heard about it constantly.

