Shared publicly  - 
 
There's been quite the debate this week about whether Facebook should show people all posts from those they follow. Even if they did, you still wouldn't see them unless you were "tuned in" 24/7. My long look at the signal versus noise issue in social media, with a stop along the way with the tricky issue of paid posts -- plus, how Google+ is in a middle ground.
41
9
Allen Firstenberg's profile photoLinda Lawrey's profile photoAlbert Gordon's profile photoHector Hurtado's profile photo
5 comments
 
+Danny Sullivan - Good article and good explanation. Unfortunately, its wrong when talking about Google+.

Google+ doesn't show all the posts of the people you follow, and it never has. Most circles are set to the "medium" volume, which appears to be that it will either hide some posts or push them further down in the stream - it isn't clear exactly what Google does.

Even for people in higher volume, posts won't necessarily show up when and where you expect them. Posts in the stream aren't chronological anymore, and Google seems to be trying to push the "more relevant" posts higher. Which is reasonable when, as you note, you just visit quickly and want to see what is new... but shockingly useless and incredibly annoying if you visit G+ more frequently.

I think the big difference is that (mostly) Google gives you some control over what you see, while there is traditionally less control in Twitter and Facebook.
 
Interesting article, thanks for the good summary of the big three. Also, I read the updated version, good job on that :)
 
Mmm, let me open up a Twitter account now ;)
Add a comment...