This Is Just Getting Sad, Larry: Google’s Latest Effort to Prop Up Google+

Google continues to scorch everything it once considered sacred in the name of propping up the most successful social media site that no one I know actually uses. (Yes, other than you, Scoble.)

Danny Sullivan wrote a great piece yesterday about Google now pimping out Google+ on its famously spartan home page. Sullivan explains why this is such a departure for Google. Sure, teasers for other Google services have crept into the homepage over the years as Google has desperately sought to diversify a revenue stream too dependent on paid search  matured.

But those teasers all took you away from the home page. This is the first thing that has allowed you to transact within the homepage like search. And it’s not just on the search page, Google+ is all up in your Google related business. Even in your Gmail.

Sullivan is pretty negative on the move, calling it “intrusive” and a huge departure for Google. The widget on the search page doesn’t bother me nearly as much as Google mucking with my search results. But the intrusion into Gmail is concerning. That feels like my space. It worries me what other things Google might do to my Gmail to prop up lame products. It’s probably the first thing that’s made me consider leaving Gmail. Not enough that I actually will, to be honest. But we’re getting close.

Google clearly doesn’t care what I think, but it should pay attention to Sullivan. He’s probably the savviest blogger on Google and one who tends to cut the search giant some slack.

But Google won’t. Page doesn’t care. He is Bill-Gates-like hell bent on Google having a horse in the social race, about six years too late to the party. He will use the brute force of all Google properties that are successful to prop up this well-designed social network that captured early adopters’ attention for a few months before going the way of FriendFeed. It’s not you, Google+, it’s us. We simply don’t need another social network, no matter how great your circles are or how badly Larry Page wants to have one. 

And outsiders– even those who are generally pro-Google like Sullivan and John Battelle– will just continue to wince on the sidelines as Page kills the credibility of one of the best technology companies in history.

People used to always joke that Eric Schmidt was merely the “adult supervision” who wasn’t responsible for much of Google’s success. But now that he’s gone and Page is in charge, it’s becoming apparent how important that adult supervision was.

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest

[...] yes, some of us out there aren’t thrilled with the results of the push. And we blog about [...]

[...] yes, some of us out there aren’t thrilled with the results of the push. And we blog about [...]

[...] そして、そう、Googleのソーシャルまっしぐら路線は、批判が多いのだ: 本誌1、本誌2、AppleボーイMG Siegler、The New York Times、Sarah Lacyおねえさんの個人ブログその1、その2、MarketingLand、focusontheuser、そしてこの記事。 [...]

[...] yes, some of us out there aren’t thrilled with the results of the push. And we blog about [...]

[...] yes, some of us out there aren’t thrilled with the results of the push. And we blog about [...]

[...] yes, some of us out there aren’t thrilled with the results of the push. And we blog about [...]

[...] yes, some of us out there aren’t thrilled with the results of the push. And we blog about [...]

[...] yes, some of us out there aren’t thrilled with the results of the push. And we blog about [...]

[...] yes, some of us out there aren’t thrilled with the results of the push. And we blog about [...]

[...] yes, some of us out there aren’t thrilled with the results of the push. And we blog about [...]

[...] yes, some of us out there aren’t thrilled with the results of the push. And we then blog about [...]

[...] yes, some of us out there aren’t thrilled with the results of the push. And we then blog about [...]

[...] was of course Sarah Lacy’s post explaining why Google+ is failing, which she summarized in two words “It’s [...]

[...] It’s Unnatural [...]

Google + has to add value to Youtube. A strong link between G+ and Youtube is the only way G+ can become valuable. A better way to categorize youtube channels available in G+ only would be a great start.

google trying to be 'all things to all people' is a recipe for disaster. i'm already getting sick of page's changes to google and with schmidt talking about sharing google data with governments is just plain creepy. f*ck you google 2.0

[...] quote of the day: We simply don’t need another social network, no matter how great your circles are or how badly Larry Page wants to have one.    [...]

[...] und Netzwerk zieht Google ebenso viel Kritik auf sich wie mit der aggressiven Bewerbung von Google+ über seine bestehenden Dienste und der erst durch Google+ notwendig gewordenen, geplanten zentralisierten Datensammlung. Auch die [...]

[...] much of the change until some serious criticisms started popping up on my radar, including one from Sarah Lacy, founder of PandoDaily and former senior editor at [...]

This article is the "first thing that’s made me consider leaving [PandoDaily]. Not enough that I actually will, to be honest. But we’re getting close". You might not like Google+, but I do. And I like the fact that Google makes it easier for me to share and connect from every touchpoint. The sad part (really sad) is that you use your position of influence to slander a great product just because in your view (egoistic?), or the view of those that you know (I really wonder), you don't need Google+, you make a judgement call for people like myself, who are capable of evaluating a service ourselves. Unfortunately, slander works. I hope you are not successful in poisoning your readers to the point so that they don't follow the natural course curiosity would have led them to, and try this great product. I think Google and their management should be commended for showing resilience and steadfastness to keep on trying, and innovating on the prevalent social experiences out there. Why should innovation be stifled? Because Sarah Lacy is content with her existing social network relationships? Are only startups allowed to innovate? Is Google not allowed to innovate? In the past search was our window to the web. Today web discovery is also via curated and shared content. I chose to use Google as my window to the web and I enjoy the fact they are making advancement in this area. From my perspective, If I choose to shop at a retailer with no relationship to Facebook, and I find myself face-to face with a Facebook Like button, and that is tolerable, why can't Google+ appear Gmail?

[...] Via Scoop.it – About GoogleGoogle continues to scorch everything it once considered sacred in the name of propping up the most successful social media site that no one I know actually uses.Via pandodaily.com [...]

"over the years as Google [has desperately sought to diversify a revenue stream too dependent on paid search] matured." I stopped reading after this. You use the fact that Google has grown, as a company, as a negative fact. It's like bringing down a guy who is African-America, and become a self-made millionaire in the years before it was all 'fair-play'. It just doesn't make sense, how you can bring down Google for trying to introduce and as you said 'diversify' itself? Google+ is a Google product, so of course it will be incorporated onto the Google homepage, ect.

I am rather surprised that people are still writing blogposts about Google+ - Only effect that Google+ had on me is, that I have quitted using facebook. Not because I switched to Google+ because I feel, this whole thing is crappy. I can not keep up with this sh*t anymore. I am now sticking to Twitter, there is much less fuss than on G+ or FB. The di*ckheads at Google won't never understand what Microsoft has not figured yet. There is No need for Bing. There is no need for google+ either. Unless of course, Facebook somehow disappears from the internet and leaving a 100B worth wide hole in the market to be filled. The last thing that any company can do to make it its failing product failing faster is, shoving it to users *throats* and have them bad taste in the mouth every time they visit gmail or google search. Facebook is not a success because it's a social website, there are millions of that now. Thing is facebook established this ' social niche' like Google established ' Search ' Niche, like Microsoft established ' Desktop ' Niche, like Apple established ' Smartphone niche ' they are the makers of their niches. Unless Google can create its own niche this time, they are only going to waste their and our time.

Not really see any problem with that. Competition is great, and the end user always has something to get from it. We need Google +, even if we use facebook more.

[...] Theory of Failure [...]

Too late to the game? Yeah, that's why facebook is scared to shit and copies all good features from google+. Look at all the "improvements" facebook made ever since google+ went beta (even the invite only one) and check who had those features and designs first. Then come again and call it a failure. Facebook is a failure. You are a failure if you trust facebook more then google (at least you can sue google if they use your data, facebook explicitly tells you that your data on facebook severs is theirs when you agree to sign up). With more Android 4 phones rolling out and even deeper g+ integration (even on iOS), you'll soon see G+ grow. Hopefully without people like you, though. And before you complain and rant even more, go to yahoo mail and bing, please!

The "We simply don’t need another _________" argument falls apart when you consider... who was that... oh, right. Google.

You say Larry Page is Bill Gates-like fixated on social. Wasn't it the Gates fixation with internet that's allowed Microsoft to remain relevant today? Without that fixation, Microsoft would probably have remained an OS and dev-tools company. And we all probably would still require Trumpet Winsock to get online. Yuck!

Google + is a bit of a fail to be blunt. It's ok for geeks and yeah Scoble loves it, its good for photos (much better than facebook) But do I "check my g+" how i "check my fb" er no, and i doubt i ever will. I have noticed that when I post on G+ they seem to promote (and no not when i have posted on +1 something) my blog and other things a bit more. Seems if you play with G+ they like you...i could be wrong but thats how it seems..which if that IS true is worrying

[...] sucks! Just ask Sarah. Just ask Danny. That box must be, like, 8,000 honking pixels. That’s, like, almost 1% of the [...]

[...] new social network has not been getting too much love from the blogosphere lately. There is this Pandodaily post, which obviously got support from one of its writers and friends, MG Siegler in [...]

I went to Google+ to see if i could find your profile, Sarah. It wasn't there. So this is a whole lot of hearsay on your part. #sigh

In the not-too-distant future, when G+ is larger than Twitter, there will still be articles discussing it's sad situation and imminent demise. "...before going the way of FriendFeed." ? You're just making shite up.

Also, remember all those articles about the death of Google's ability to innovate? People said they were a cluster-feck of poorly integrated services, with UIs designed by engineers. A sad situation, it was. And their lack of a real social effort was deemed positively a breach of fiduciary duty. Damned if you do...

Some people obviously enjoy G+ and find value with the service and nothing wrong with that. I post on G+ daily mostly out of fear that it will some day be relevant for mainstream business people, but it continues to disappoint.Whether you love it or hate it, it is really hard to argue with Sarah's point that Google is looking increasingly desperate in their promotion of G+

I don't see them as desperate. Think about it...when you watch a show on network TV what programs do they advertise on commercials? Their own, of course. If you buy a product online and sign up for their newsletter what do they promote? Their other products for sure. Read a book and what's on the last few pages? Advertisements for the author's other books. Why should Google be held to a different standard. They are a publicly traded company trying to create value for their shareholders. If they didn't attempt to leverage their other properties to advertise G+ I would question their business sense.

I wouldn't argue that at this point they should be pushing it and leveraging it across all their properties. However, here is my litmus test of how G+ is doing with the mainstream business community. I work in an office of about 125 people, a well known global commercial real estate company. On July 8th of 2011 I joined G+ and I was the only person in my office with a G+ account. Today there is 2, me and the marketing director. They can't get any traction with the business community. I don't question their business sense, but I am surprised they are struggling with it as much as they are.

I don't use G+ for "business". I'm not selling anything nor do I have any sort of marketing agenda. I use G+ to engage with others on topics that truly interest me. I'm not trying to leverage it for wealth building. I use it because I can engage with others about things I'm passionate about. If your social networking goal is only to increase your net worth or expand your profedional network then G+ probably isnt for you. Plenty of people find joy in the network though. Shouldn't that be good enough to call it successful?

hola, my Inglish is litel, sorry speak spanish

I think Sarah Lacy is twitter's b!tch.

This obsession with propping up G+ at all costs is also damaging the UI of their Chrome browser - they apparently removed the "+" symbol from the "new tab" button because of this. http://parislemon.com/post/17777881546/bring-back-the-plus

Do you really feel that removing the + is damaging to the UI? When I noticed the change I just thought , "huh, OK" then moved on with my day. :)

Exactly. That's what I did. But some people see conspiracy theories in everything.

Did we need another tech blog with link bait headlines?

I am not sure I agree with the "We simply don’t need another social network" argument, it is comperable to saying don't need another tech blog, cloud storage or any other product. There is *always* room for innovation and funny how a blog that covers startups can't see that. While I can't say I use Google+ yet, I do like Google (and Microsoft or anybody else for that matter) to keep innovating and give us FB alternatives.

FB alternatives — absolutely.

[...] sucks! Just ask Sarah. Just ask Danny. That box must be, like, 8,000 honking pixels. That’s, like, almost 1% of the [...]

[...] sucks! Just ask Sarah. Just ask Danny. That box must be, like, 8,000 honking pixels. That’s, like, almost 1% of the [...]