This post originated from an RSS feed registered with Agile Buzz
by Martin Fowler.
Original Post: Bliki: SocialNetworks
Feed Title: Martin Fowler's Bliki
Feed URL: http://martinfowler.com/feed.atom
Feed Description: A cross between a blog and wiki of my partly-formed ideas on software development
I wasn't cool enough to be in the first wave of invitations, but
I have now got onto Google+,
the Maybe Next Big Thing in social networks. It seems somewhat
appropriate to mark this Momentous Event by writing a little bit
about how I've used social networks so far, and some uninformed
speculation about the impact of Google+
My initial reaction to social networks was suspicion. At heart I'm a
misanthropic hermit with enough intelligence to put on a veneer of
sociability. So I was never tempted by the early social networks
like MySpace, and I still regularly refuse any requests to Link In.
I'd kept half an eye on Twitter, but was slow to get
involved. Someone registered the name @martinfowler and started
feeding my blog posts into it. I was worried that it may be a
squatter, but it was actually a nice programmer who happily
handed over the account when I asked for it. Eventually my colleague
Doc List got me
going on Twitter and now it's a regular part of my life. Shortly
afterward I joined Facebook too.
I use the two networks quite differently, which is partly the
function of my fate of being a geek celebrity. Twitter is a public
facing stream, where anything I tweet goes out 35,000
followers. With Facebook I only link to people who I know
personally. At a simple level I can think of Twitter as my
professional side and Facebook as my social side - but that's a bit
of a stretch since so many of my friends are also professional links.
Twitter is a fascinating social construct. It's a mix of features
that I can't imagine someone would design up-front [1]. The 140 character limit is one of those silly
technology fiats, yet it works well. As one wit observed "the
problem with Twitter is that you are limited to 140 characters, the
genius of Twitter is that everyone else is limited to 140
characters" [2]. Similarly the asymmetric follow
(35,000 follow me, but I only follow 300) coupled with mentions
(which get my attention) works better than I would have ever thought
if someone described it to me. All in all it allows me to keep a
good sense of connection without drowning in the flood of text.
Almost all the people I follow on Twitter are people I know
personally. I read pretty much all the tweets from people I follow or people
who mention me. I check the stream pretty regularly, several times a
day most days. I post a few times a day when at home, a bit less
when traveling. I choose my public posts conscious of the fact that I
have so many followers, so I try to post things that are interesting
to my perception of that crowd. Mostly these are links to
interesting articles, which naturally include anything I write. I
reply a bit more casually as I see things from friends or
mentions. I find Twitter a useful source of web links to read which
supplement my regular blog feeds. I also enjoy the feedback on my
own contributions that appear whenever I tweet a new post.
With Facebook, I know that people who see my posts are only
people I know reasonably well. The other difference is that my
non-geek friends don't use Twitter but many do use Facebook. I don't
check Facebook so often, usually only once or twice a day. My posts
there don't include geek stuff, mostly they are either interesting
social things we are doing. One common thing I
links to my photo albums.
One issue for me is how to deal with people who are on both
services. My approach is to almost never post the same thing to both
places, along the geek/social divide. But several of my friends copy
all posts to both services. I'm still unsure how to deal with that,
I could block them on Facebook, but then I'd miss some
conversations.
I use a consistent avatar photo on any site that I use. People
are used to recognizing faces, so I think it's only reasonable to
use a regular face photo as an avatar. It's frustrating when someone
posts and I can't remember who it is because I haven't learned to
match their face to their name yet. [3]
Overall I've come to be very glad of both services. The nature of
my life means I have friends all over the globe and it's good to
keep some low-level regular contact with them. I was never one for
sending off emails, and have always disliked phone calls. Posting
short messages about what we're up to work well for me.
So how will Google+ fit into this? Of course I don't really know,
there's no sensible way of predicting the outcome. The question for
me is whether Google offers something that the current
Twitter/Facebook combo does not. From the small amount of use I've
put it too so far it looks well put together. Circles seem to me to
be a very useful feature that matches how I see most people's social
interactions. [4] (Although as George
Dinwiddie pointed
out - remember that Google (and Doubleclick) are in all your
circles.)
On the whole I'm very happy with Twitter and will need a lot of
persuading to shift off it. Facebook, I'm less excited about and
could easily see me moving. The circles notion could be just right
for that context.
But the key issue here is that it doesn't matter what I think or
do, it's what all my contacts do that counts. I mostly have a
Facebook account because people I want to keep in contact with have
a Facebook account. If they don't move to Google+ I'm staying with
Facebook even if Google+ is nicer. That's why Google+ has a huge
mountain to climb, especially since I don't want to check Yet
Another Social Network. I suspect there may only be room for one of
Google+ and Facebook.
So far this makes Google+ only marginally interesting to me. It's
rather like Wave was - a cool idea but of little use if nobody else
is using it. What may be the difference is tying in with Gmail. I
always got the sense that the Wave and Gmail teams weren't on
speaking terms, hence their software never seemed to be
either. Google+ allows you to link to people who aren't on Google+
but do have your email address, your posts go to these people as
email. I could do with this already for some non-Facebook friends,
and it could be an important booster to getting people to use
Google+. In general there seems to be a determination with Google+
to tie in with other Google services. This may be the lever they
need to shift Facebook, other than their obvious advantage, but it will still be a
big challenge.
1:
I'm sure that somewhere on the web is a really interesting article
on the evolution of Twitter's features and their impact on social
interaction. When you find it, please tweet it to me.
2: Sadly I don't remember who said this, or the
exact wording. If someone knows, please let me know. Otherwise I'd
be happy to claim the attribution.
3:
If you do use a face as your avatar, please use full face only (not
head and shoulders) otherwise it will be too small to see. Also make
sure there's enough light on your face to be able to see it properly
at that small size.
4:
I've heard some people say that circles are a big innovation. I find
that astonishing, surely it's obvious that people interact
differently with different groups of contacts? I think the fact that
Facebook didn't do this is that they are fixation in their view of
the world that people should be public - which also explains their
regular missteps over privacy.