Google+ has made Twitter boring, here’s what Twitter should do about that. For the past few days I’ve been hanging out in Jackson Hole with a bunch of geeks and one thing I’ve noticed over and over is how boring Twitter has gotten when compared to Google+. Why has Twitter turned boring? I’ve found several areas: 1. First experience. 2. Pictures and videos. 3. Control over content distribution. 4. So, let’s take each of these areas on, and talk about what Twitter could do to make users excited again. Forget everything you know about social networks. Which one draws you in more? So, what can Twitter do? 1. 2. 3. Google+ has beautiful photos and videos. So, what could Twitter do? Google+ lets me publish a post to JUST A SINGLE PERSON +or+ to a small group of people, or, even, to a circle that has 5,000 members in it. Why does this make Twitter boring? What can Twitter do? I look at Twitter and a lot of it has turned into a boring RSS feed. YOU CAN SEE WHO YOU EXCITED AND WHO YOU PISSED OFF (and you can see same for other people)
Why Twitter Should be Very Worried About Google+ When Google unexpectedly launched its new social network Google+ earlier this week, many pundits were skeptical about the company’s latest attempt to enter the social arena. Given Google’s dismal track record when it comes to these kinds of products, that kind of skepticism made sense, but after using it extensively for the last few days, I can’t help but think that it is the single biggest threat Twitter has had to face yet. Google, being late to the party, had the advantage of being able to learn from Twitter, Facebook and every other social network out there right now. Note: I’m consciously not saying that it’s a threat to Facebook (at least not for now), as I think the group dynamics and strong network effect that made Facebook what it is today will continue to be relevant and have locked users in for now.
Twitter’s Problem and Google’s Advantage What Google+ makes abundantly clear is that Twitter’s success was a happy accident. Why Twitter Should be Concerned What do You Think? Is Google+ a bigger threat to Twitter than it is to Facebook? Since Google+ came out, there’s been a lot of focus on whether it’s a “Facebook-killer,” in part because it has a lot of similar features such as photo-sharing and status updates, but also because Google+ “Circles” seem like such a big improvement on what Facebook offers. But there’s just as much — if not more — reason to see Google’s offering as a Twitter competitor, and some users are already talking about how they are using Twitter less and Google+ more.
Is the Google network just benefitting from “shiny new object” syndrome, or is it a real threat? A couple of high-profile tech-industry types have already announced they are shifting their allegiance to Google+ and away from other social networks, including Twitter. They aren’t the only ones to suggest Google+ is going to take time away from other networks. It’s real-time. Suster is right about all these benefits to the Twitter network. Google+ vs. Twitter: Planned Community vs. Organic Growth. In many ways, the story of Google+ and Twitter is that of a planned community vs. organic growth. Twitter was never conceived to be what it is today.
Its success was purely accidental and thanks to being in the right place at the right time. Its early years were chaotic. Users invented features that Twitter later canonized (@ replies, RTs etc.). Now, Twitter has grown to be a major success, but even after all these years, the company still struggles to explain what it really does and the old conventions that made perfect sense as it grew up now make potential mainstream users feel like they don’t understand how it works.
Compare that to Google+. Google+ = What Twitter Could’ve Been if it had Known What it Wanted to Be While many pundits prefer to think about Google+ in terms of what it means for Facebook, I’ve argued elsewhere that Twitter should be more concerned about it than Facebook. Google’s Advantage: It Knows What it Wants Google+ to Be Celebration, FL vs. Why changing Twitter’s 140-character limit is a dumb idea. Maybe it’s the influence of Google+, but suddenly everyone seems to be talking about what’s wrong with Twitter. First it was the quintessential social-media early adopter, Robert Scoble, complaining that the arrival of Google’s social network has made Twitter “boring,” and recommending all kinds of things the service needs to do to change. Now Slate columnist Farhad Manjoo has jumped into the act, arguing that Twitter needs to drop its famous 140-character limit in order to be more competitive. Both are missing the point. Sometimes, a social network that just does one thing well is much better than one that does a whole lot of things poorly.
That’s not to say there aren’t plenty of things that Twitter could do better. But these are growing pains that lots of companies have — they are not about pivotal or crucial flaws in the product itself. Falling into the “feature-creep” trap The 140-character limit is crucial Post and thumbnail photos courtesy of Flickr user zert sonstige.