Today's League post was about Google+. While I'm not going to go into all the deets of what I said there, I'll add here that I am on G+ now, so if you'd like to add me, please feel free! I'm at the point now where I'm basically adding everyone who's added me, but if you'd like to add a little note about who you are (i.e. author, book blogger, librarian) then that will help me sort you into the proper circles later.
I know a lot of people's first response to G+ was "not another social networking site! *groan*" And yeah, I get that. I feel like we have Facebook and we have Twitter and G+ is a little bit of both Twitter and Facebook. But the thing I like about G+ is that it takes the two things I dislike about Facebook and Twitter and changes it.
--What I dislike about Facebook: Privacy issues. There's not just the fact that FB has a very poor stance on a person's privacy to start with, there's also the issue with what you share with whom. I have a Page and a personal profile. Anyone can go on the Page, and I limit what I put there--it's all book-specific and author-specific stuff, stuff I wouldn't mind anyone in the world knowing. But on my personal profile (which, I'm sorry, but only people I know in real life are allowed to be on) I include pictures of my family and updates about my life that I want to share with family and friends I don't see everyday. But flipping back and forth between the two is a pain, and keeping things separated is sometimes difficult.
--G+ fixes the privacy issue for me. Because with G+ I only have one place to go--my own G+ profile--and I can filter from there who sees what. In G+ you create "circles" and you have the option of what you share with which circles. I have a "family" circle which will get the info and pictures that I would post on my Facebook profile page--the stuff that I want to limit to people I know in real life. But I also have circles for fellow writers, book bloggers, and librarians. I can easily post to any circle with just a click. Also: this helps ensure that the proper people get the proper info. I can post articles on writing for writers without bugging bloggers. I can post something about books for all the book-related circles without bugging my family.
Additionally, with the way circles are set up: anyone can follow you (unless you block them), but you're not obligated to follow back--it's similar to Twitter in that regard.
--What I dislike about Twitter: Keeping track of conversations. If I'm not online for a few days specifically, I sometimes get very lost in who said what, especially if there's more than one conversation going on. Also, I like to @-reply to everyone, and I sometimes miss out on that.
--Also: Not being able to easily see what a link or picture is. Call me lazy, but I don't always want to click on something. I often have slow internet, and it's kinda a pain to stop everything and wait for a pic or link to load.
--G+ keeps all conversations together, like in Facebook, and shows a smaller version of a pic or an extra bit of a link in a post, also like in Facebook. So there's that problem fixed.
As you can see, G+ is a little like Facebook (in appearances) and a little like Twitter (in functionality) with an additional bonus of organization (with circles). Do you need to sign up for it right away? No. But it's neat (especially for a technophile like me) to see how these sorts of things develop. Will G+ stick around? I think so. Judging by the rapid flock of people to the site, and how people really are thinking it takes the best of Twitter and Facebook into one world, I think G+ is a site that will continue to grow...until the next big thing.
9 comments:
Hey Beth...I'm new to Google +, so when I read your post, I added you to my page. I teach English at West Lincoln High School in Lincolnton (down the road from Burns High). I read your book when it came out and LOVED it! Many of my students read it, too, and loved it as well.
I just signed up for Google+ today and had no idea what to do next, so thanks for the explanation! I added you to my "writing folks" circle. :-)
Thanks for putting your commentary about G+ here. I haven't received an invite yet but I haven't been actively searching for one either because, like you said, who needs another social networking site to content with. But your thoughts made me rethink my initial reaction and perhaps check it out when the time comes.
Thanks so much for this review. I was skeptical at first--same thing: "not another time-suck!" but I dislike FB because of the privacy thing, and I'd love to dump them. So Google+ looks like a nice alternative. Will RT!
Thanks for the educational post Beth. I was curious what the differences were, but have not had time to read much on the topic.
I'll go check out your other post.
Thanks for the break down of why G+ is good. I was wondering about it. My husband and some of his friends are on it. So I wasn't sure, but I think I just might relent
I heard about this a couple days ago and thought 'oh, no, not another one'. Thanks for the skinny on it. I might just break down and join now that I have a better understanding.
I actually wasn't too sure about G+, but your post is really making me like the sound of it. I'll check it out :)
BTW, I just saw the cover for AMS on Goodreads - so gorgeous! You get the best covers :D
Do you have to get your Google + people to accept you or can you just follow them? I don't think I can take more media where I am waiting for people to like/accept me. It's like waiting for agent emails.
Post a Comment