I'm sorry to say it +Yifat Cohen
but I honestly think it's a laziness issue. It's not that +Harry McCracken
or anyone else doesn't realize that Google+ isn't just another social media platform, it's that he can't combat the belief system that no one needs a second social media network. People who have seasons tickets to one theatre company in New York often think they don't need to go to any other theatre company. People eat in the same handful of restaurants when they go out to eat and often return to the same places for vacations year after year after year. If someone plays tennis well, they are hardly likely to go make the effort and spend the money to learn ballroom dancing.
People are creatures of habit. They often don't want to change, they don't want to expand their horizons, they don't want to try anything new. They want to read +TIME
and that's it!
When it comes to Google+ there are two kinds of people I think: Those who have been on FB and will always stay there not really out of choice but because it was the only platform for such a long, long time. And those who, now that there is a choice, will ask themselves what is right for them, whether it takes effort to venture into uncharted waters or not.
For many of us being online "socially" with all of the friends and family we know in our "real" lives would be a duplicity. Google+ offers an opportunity to grow way beyond one's boundaries. That clearly isn't for everyone.
Either way, does it really matter? Not to me it doesn't. I don't get my news from +TIME
. I figure it out for myself.