This pretty much sums it up...
Originally shared by David Blanar
It's been an emotional roller coaster this week and taken me a little while to put my thoughts together on the news about G+.
I'm glad people are finding workable alternatives. I wish them a smooth and seamless migration. I'm not ready to leave and don't (yet) feel the need. But that may change.
I've not met Mike Elgan though I have many times appreciated his words and ideas through the years; I fully expect he would be great to have a beer with. But I profoundly (and respectfully) disagree with his conclusion:
Social is dead and we can - and should - retreat to our blog safe spaces.
(See his excellent and thought-provoking post: https://plus.google.com/+MikeElgan/posts/gNz2B2Rw7uV)
This ghettoised approach will never work for me. Nor do I think it desirable on a societal level. Is social dead? That seems dramatic, even if worth seriously discussing. We need public commons and shared spaces that are not under the aegis of our personal domain names. I feel pretty strongly about this.
Maybe in time I'll share a little bit more about my feelings and experience with G+ as an insider. But for now, the below fairly reflects where I'm at.
Well said.
ReplyDeleteBrilliant.
ReplyDeletePerfect!
ReplyDeleteEspecially the second part. I've been seeing so many people saying Google should split it off, or make their code public, or reverse their decision. And that it's not fair they're doing this.
Well, none of that holds up to the reality of making business decisions.
If you want to be in denial, fine. But don't think that a company giving you a free product necessarily has any incentive or requirement to continue providing that product for free, or at all.
Remember, G+ is not really free; it's "free for me". Meaning, while we the users don't have to pay anything, someone has to. That someone is Google. And if they can't make money off their product, then (like any business) they're no longer going to produce that product.
Well said Robyn Richards - it's great to hear some common sense in the sea of wailing.
ReplyDeletePretty much where I'm at. I'm willing to bow out of social media altogether. G+ provided the separation, a level of anonymity, and the potential to make quite distinct and discrete sets of "friends" all within a framework that (with the exception of the occasional blockable troll) allows exchange of ideas, even heated discussions, with no need for technical savvy. I will miss it when it's gone.
ReplyDeletei think Google should give their real reasons for killing G+, rather than fobbing us off.
ReplyDeleteJohn Victor Your point is well taken and astute. Still though, I can not help but point out that Google has no shortage of other products and revenue streams. I am left to draw the conclusion that the diminutive philanthropic aspect of the Google juggernaut could probably benefit from a swift kick in the....... board of directors. TNQ
ReplyDeleteCarl Draper
ReplyDeleteWhy? Would knowing the "real" reason make any difference- to anyone??
Andrew Hatchett I'd be less pissed off about it
ReplyDeleteThe problem with the "free product" argument is that G+ has never been free. From day one, everything we post here, all of our interactions, have been logged and fed to their algorithms.
ReplyDeleteBack in the beginning G+ was supposed to be the social layer that would make all of us just give copious amounts of user data to Google on levels that would make Facebook salivate.
And yet, instead of doubling down on the integration they gave up on it... Then complained the gutted, abandoned, directionless product didn't have the mass appeal they'd like.