I think there’s a certain agreement that social media engagement–by those who engage, that is–is reaching its saturation point. The problem is, that’s the same point Google+ has been introduced. Right now, the “power” in most “power” social media users’ engagement comes from Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn. Will Google+ be an alternate or a fourth “must have?”
I’ve just joined Google+ (so have you if you’ve joined, I’m assuming, since it’s only 24 days old), and it’s going to take me a bit to get my bearings (read: check it since the day I joined). So I’ll spare you my thoughts. But the invites and the circles and the ruminations, cautious optimism, analysis, and even love is already showing up in a few of the circles I run in. But along with it is a shadow of doom, because if we feel the obligation to join now (“Hurry and register your nickname before it’s taken” sound familiar?), it’s going to become yet another thing to check. For those of us whose job this is, I’m sure there’s no objection. But for those of us whose job is to run a business, it’s going to become another burden we’ll delight in and commiserate about all the same.
So please go take a look at the opinions in the links above if you haven’t read them already and tell me what you think. Will the triumvirate become a tetrad or will the current three be broken up into other combinations of three including Google+?
And does anyone have a more supreme-sounding word for a group of four? Tetrad sounds like AP Biology.