Is Real-Time Search Important?

Real-time search delivers the ability to take the pulse of the nation (or world, for that matter) on a given subject at a given moment. Want to see how the public feels about the latest Presidential address? Real-time search is the answer. But the data doesn’t come without cost.

This goes for everyone, but especially you Facebook fanatics: Rethink what you make public. Be sure you want it out there.

Use real-time search to find out what people are saying. To build connections with people of similar interests. To monitor what’s being said about your brand. But don’t use public G+ updates to vent or to share embarrassing information.

Worth the Look?

Definitely worth the look, but not as useful yet as we’d like. Search result snippets like those you see above reference relevant results, but the links lead to user profiles, not individual posts. Finding a single comment made by a user could be a chore. Design and user experience are also lacking in this interface.

Google might not have all public G+ updates incorporated into Google search yet, but don’t think for a second that it isn’t coming.

Related Posts:

• I Wish It Weren’t True, But Twitter’s Getting Plussed
• Beware the Circle: How Google+ Tempts Us to Be Socially Inept
• How Do Google+ Features Affect Our Social Skills?
• How Do I Get My Site Indexed on Google?
• Search Engine Submissions are Laughable

I should have named this post, “How I Use Different Social Networks”.But I didn’t, because even though you’d come to visit that post, it’s not exactly the focus.

The Premise

If I had my way, the two social networks I’d use going forward would be Twitter and Google+. I COULD stick to them and let Facebook go.

The Only Problem Is

1. I won’t get to choose based on my preference for the technology. I’ll choose based upon the connections I’ve made through that technology.
   
2. Too many people I know are on Facebook who won’t adapt a new technology unless something goes terribly wrong.

Here’s how my social media friendships work:

Facebook – people I’ve gone to school with, church with, formerly worked with, or real life friends with. Most of these people clung to MySpace like the Titanic, or they’d never joined a prior social network other than Classmates.com. They don’t care whether they’re participating in social networking or social media. They’re just using Facebook as an extension of themselves. It’s not a shiny new toy as much as it is the new email, the new IM, the new party invitation, and the new photo album.

Twitter – people in my industry, people with similar interests, and two dozen or so people I know in real life. I met some of these people online through forums, blogs, indirect twitter conversations, and, let’s be honest, #followfriday. While 60% of these people wouldn’t instantly recognize me if I walked past them on the street, they’re fascinating people who care about some of the same things I care about. That’s worth something.

Google+ – people in my industry, people with similar interests, and a dozen or so people I know in real life. After a very short time, I am connected with more people on Google+ than I am on either Twitter or Facebook. Why? Because it’s new and people treat new social media tools as mile markers in life. People you don’t connect with well on Twitter suddenly become more interesting because you share a new bond: early adoption of a social network. You start off by talking way too much about that new network, and hopefully discover you share some common interests along the way.

Do you seem the troubling pattern? Maybe not unless you realize how much I love my Twitter. Though not every one of my tweeps are using Google+, I’m getting essentially the same benefits as with Twitter. Except G+ is new and so there aren’t as many people on yet with similar interests that aren’t tech-centric.

I’m Not a Happy Camper

So I’m stuck. I’m using Google+ more than Twitter these days, which is easier because the vast majority of people I’m connected to on + were hardcore Twitter users. And it makes sense because Twitter was populated by early adopters… those same people who are now playing with the shiny new toy over at Google.

So if I let connecting with people become priority #1 (lame, I know), I would stop using Twitter and just manage Facebook and Google+. Sigh. I don’t know. That would be like sending one of my children away because we don’t have enough food.

Do you have a similar dilemma? How do YOU use each social networking tool and which will you choose going forward?

Related Posts:

• How Do Google+ Features Affect Our Social Skills?
• A Proverb on Self-Promotion
• ORM Approaches the Tipping Point
• Three Losing Approaches to Social Media Marketing
• Twitter No Longer the Only Public Social Search Engine

One of the greatest, and potentially harmful, functionalities of Google Plus is Circles. I know firsthand what’s it’s like to lose a virtual friend because we only share 25% common interests or less. Twitter has always been more suited for topical friendships than Facebook, but you still find yourself limited by the firehose of other things people want or don’t want to talk about.

Enter Google+ Circles

Google+ is the first major social networking platform to solve this. With Circles, you can arrange friends into topical circles. Feel free to browse my Google+ Circles here. I’ve broken people down into groups, so that I can talk with them on things that match our common interests. The one exception would be Close Friends (or my future Men’s Group), in which I might share more private things that don’t make it into any other group.

Convenient or Crippling? Yes.

Circles is amazing. It allows me to avoid annoying people who only follow me because of my thoughts on digital marketing. Believe it or not, I’ve had more controversy over sharing sports than faith. And that’s what motivated this post.

What we gain in convenience and usability, we lose in character and relational skills. If I can limit you to only the posts you are interested in or agree with, we never really know each other. We may never get the opportunity to grow through disagreement or controversy. Granted, not all SEOs think the same way, so I can have plenty of controversy within that one circle. But what about expanding our horizons through actual relationship?

Hold On There, Partner. That’s What REAL People Are For.

Maybe that’s your reaction. Maybe we shouldn’t care about the limitations because we have real face-to-face relationships to provide all the controversy and discomfort one could ever need. Maybe asking for more from an online social network is asking too much.

What do you think? Are we better off for segmenting what we say to who? Or do we just become more skilled at PR, passing the right messages to the right groups at the right times?

Is Google+ an extension of real relationship? Or is it merely a tool for gathering information and building our influence?

Related Posts:

• Twitter No Longer the Only Public Social Search Engine
• I Wish It Weren’t True, But Twitter’s Getting Plussed
• How Do Google+ Features Affect Our Social Skills?
• How Do I Get My Site Indexed on Google?
• Search Engine Submissions are Laughable

In case you the two of you following this were wondering what happened to yesterday’s post – I wrote it, then forgot to link here.

I joined the Google+ social network recently and decided to start sharing my thoughts. This is the first of many posts on the subject. Perhaps a bit more philosophical than future posts on social networking, but it’s a blog about purpose, so there you go.

Read the rest of my first Google+ post here.

Related Posts:

• I Wish It Weren’t True, But Twitter’s Getting Plussed
• Three Losing Approaches to Social Media Marketing
• Twitter No Longer the Only Public Social Search Engine
• Beware the Circle: How Google+ Tempts Us to Be Socially Inept
• Blogs and Social Networking: Know Your Limits

It’s rather obvious that most executives are not going to understand the value of proactive reputation management. After all, if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it… right? Managing something you don’t know or believe could actually become a problem is not worth the monthly maintenance fee of several thousand dollars. Or is it? Only the cautious, conservative investor is likely to acknowledge the wisdom in proactively managing and guarding the corporate brand reputation.

Why spend money on something that hasn’t happened yet? Well, as Downhill points out, “Extensive reputation repair can entail building out as many as 10 sites – in other words 10 separate SEO jobs. At the heart of reputation management is an effective organic SEO strategy, and as we know – good organic SEO is not cheap.”

Well said. Building out sites and pages to fill the top 10 results of Google, Yahoo, MSN Live, and Ask will inevitably cost you much more when you’re competing with a solid negative authorities already in the top 10. The earlier you establish your presence, the better your chances of remaining at the top.

Let’s consider the options:

$3k-5k per month for proactive reputation management, OR

$40k+ per month for last minute emergency reputation repair.

Hmmm….. tough decision.

Related Posts:

• A Look at Belkin Mechanical Turk Response
• Green Trendsetting through Telecommuting
• The Slippery Slope of Celebrity Reputation Management
• Data Loss Leads to Reputation Crises
• 6 Easy Steps to Personal Reputation Management