Is “Google Plus” the Black Box Social Network?

Thanks to one of my good friends, I have had a chance to review the newest online social network service by Google called Google Plus. For the most part, I have enjoyed the simple way the Google Plus allows users to organize and maintain a conversation. I have posted a partial review on the Center for Society and Cyberstudies website. However, I will say that I think that I will use Plus as a soundboard for ideas, I don’t think this service will replace Facebook or Twitter in my life as a form of engagement with the connected society.

Google working within the realm of social networks is not a foreign concept. Google has attempted to purchase its way into the space with Orkut, tried to redefine the space with services like Google Wave and Google Buzz & even provide support for connecting user between the different social network and the rest of the web with their support of the OpenID Initiative. However, this week Google attempted to carve their space within the online social network world with their introduction of Google Plus. The primary repeated reason that people are using Google Plus is that its Facebook without being Facebook. It is this paradoxical conflict that finds its way through most of cyber-culture, once a service becomes too popular, the early adopter is more apt to the leave the service for a service that is less crowded and allows for different engagement between the members. Google Plus’ differences seem to be lessons from the services that are popular (Facebook and Twitter) and the experience from the failures of the past (Google Wave).

One of the points that seem to be noticeable when using Google Plus is that there isn’t a public feed or stream. This lack of a stream appears to point at the fact that Google Plus isn’t meant to be used as a mass broadcasting system, preferably a service of conversations. This point is noted quite often by the experts in the field. The second point that was indicated by me is the fact that users can only initiate mass conversations within the network that have a critical mass of followers (typically above 2,000 followers). The critical mass changes the posts from stand-alone posts to starting points of engaging conversations within the network. The rest of the user within the network make do with one-to-one or one-to-few conversation within the network. This system as of now isn’t meant for the mass broadcasting of content the way that a service like Facebook or Twitter can broadcast.

The cynical thought that I have to conclude my analysis of Google Plus is that perhaps Google is using Google Plus to bring more users to their mobile platform, Android. The rationale for this statement is the fact that there doesn’t seem to be apps for Google Plus outside of Android. This lack of an app may be corrected in the future, but as of now if you want to use Google Plus mobility, you must have an Android phone.

For the most part, I enjoyed the minimalist nature of the service as it seems to allow for simple conversations without the interruptions created by the apps of other services. However, for Google Plus to become more useful, there must be greater connection points and services to make it more than a cork board of information. For this to become a mode of vox populous, there must be some other connection between the network and the web other than the simple linking of information.