It’s been a good month for social media. In an industry that constantly changes, where this blog post will be outdated in two months, nothing changed. Which is weird to say because so much change has taken place in the formats and applications on some of the major sites. Facebook announced it was going to up its policy on user privacy, all the while with a secret agenda. Not to mention, the highly anticipated Facebook Timelines is set to unveil…soon. All these changes have many in the social world wondering if Facebook will ever get dethroned, Google comes in and reminds us all that they’re still here.
Google + unveiled Brand Pages this last week. Something they had struggled to keep under wraps with an aggressive world of businesses out there trying to stay on the cutting edge of everything social. I feel though that this launch may have been a bit premature, which is weird for Google, they normally wouldn’t do that (COUGH Google Buzz!). I do admit though there are several things I like about these pages, they are simple and equal; something Facebook Pages WERE until they found out how to make money off of them. That said, here’s a few things I’d like to see in Google Brands 2.0
1) Multiple Admins: Right now only one person can commandeer the Brand Page. That’s either a huge commitment to put on one person for the long haul (although it’s some awesome job security) or a huge responsibility on an intern, seeing as how social media for some reason tends to be a task many businesses throw at interns. In order to successfully run a Brand, you need multiple minds working on it. This should translate over the Brand Pages that Google offers.
2) The Chance To Add Profiles On Brand’s Own Accord: In an ideal world, Google has set this up perfectly: brands can follow other brands freely, but brands can only follow profiles after the profile follows them. Problem is we do NOT live in a perfect world and several businesses have already set up profiles for their respective shops and refuse to give up what they’ve built. I understand this is for the benefit of the public, but to limit that process of how brands connect is to limit the business in general.
3) Analytics: Facebook Pages have a great analytics system, tracking everything from user base to the frequency of that user base. The irony here comes from the fact that it’s Google inspired. Google has one of the greatest analytics systems in the cyber-world, yet they can’t apply that to their social baby?
4) Apps: They’re everywhere. Steve Jobs made apps a necessity for every new device. So much so that companies can live and die by it. To avoid an applications option makes sense only in that it truly levels the playing field for all businesses in having to use what’s given to you. This would be a great concept that could have huge success…were it not for Facebook and its thriving app business. No apps, no big business. That doesn’t sound like Google.
Google + has it’s flaws, from pages to profiles, but what social site doesn’t? That’s why it’s always changing, evolving and initially receives major criticism. That is until users become accustomed to them and another round of changes comes forth, then they complain about how why it wasn’t like the concepts before. Google Brands are no different, this layout will not be he same a couple months from now, even weeks. Because the social competition is so high Google can’t afford to keep it the same. Or maybe it can. One thing we’ve seen Google become highly efficient at is getting back up after the 2-count and delivering a knockout. Like this last week, with Facebook unveiling and planning to unveil) all of it’s changes, Google comes in and throws a curve. It’s just Google being Google.