Tag Archives: backlash

Google Buzz may have had a lot of expectations attached to it, as Google attempted yet again to make its existing apps more social. Unfortunately for Google, the company saw a great deal of immediate backlash from the sharing process around Google Buzz. Apparently the socialization around your email contacts isn’t something most people want automated. Fancy that.

Google was quick to respond to the backlash, changing the process for auto-follow and recommendations just days after launching Google Buzz to the public. Yet the level of backlash Google Buzz received only reminds us of consumer influence and the way in which companies need to consider consumer privacy and needs before releasing certain features and functionality.

Admittedly, I only used Google Buzz for a short while after its launch, primarily responding to comments others left on my Buzzed content. I like the concept, especially as I already use Gmail for work-related communication on a daily basis, bookmarking, scheduling, managing my Twitter, and just about everything else you can possibly think of. And I didn’t mind the auto-follow process, as I already used Google Reader and Gchat to such an extent that the people active in my Google Buzz were the people I already corresponded with on a regular enough basis.

Yet I can understand how the automated process would bother others, and even myself in the long run. Even with all the things about Google Buzz that I liked or didn’t mind, I still haven’t gone back to use it since its launch. And now that the auto-follow standards have changed, I see even less activity in my Google Buzz as it pertains to things and people I’m interested in.

I’m sure the whole “auto” thing was something Google was really banking on for the adopted use of Google Buzz, but things don’t work that easily when it comes to the social sharing of content. Many of your Gmail connections weren’t selected or approved of as “friends,” but as people you communicate with on a relatively regular basis. Perhaps it’s more difficult than we thought to create a social network around these kinds of contacts.

I expect the privacy backlash to become even more of a concern as we move forward with various social networking initiatives. Companies like Google, Facebook, Microsoft and Twitter are destined to push their boundaries, testing the consumer to see where the line is drawn. Consumers will, in turn, push back when they feel they’re being violated. We may never reach a happy medium, but instances such as the one we saw with Google Buzz indicates that consumers are beginning to pay attention once again to their social networking privacy standards.

A recent poll has indicated that users prefer the old retweet method to the new one, instituted by Twitter within the past two months. The poll, conducted by Karen Goel, found that 64% of participants prefer the old version of retweets. Are users longing for the old retweets because of nostalgia, or did Twitter make a misstep in switching up the retweet process?

If you recall, the old retweet method simply allowed you to copy and paste a message into your tweet update box, leaving you with the responsibility of adding the “RT” at the beginning of the message to indicate that you are quoting another Twitter user. Instead of merely repeating what someone else has already said, the typical behavior was to add in your own comment even before typing in “RT.” This way, you express your own opinion, speak on the content you’re sharing, and give attribution to the originator of that shared content. It was, in fact, an all-in-one solution.

The downfall, however, was the inability to easily retweet directly from Twitter. A good portion of the retweeting actions were performed through third party Twitter apps, most of which are equipped with a retweet button. If you see a tweet that you would like to quickly and easily share with your own followers, simply hit the provided retweet button. You can still add in your own comments, but the task of copying and pasting, and adding the “RT” form of attribution was done automatically.

As Twitter has also had to monitor and regulate certain abused features on its site, however, its own rendition of retweeting took things a step further in order to preserve the attribution process. When Twitter finally did add in a retweet option, it made the process unnecessarily confusing and too automated. There is no longer an option to add in your own comments, as Twitter felt that a retweet should hold the integrity of the original comment and not have the option of being changed.

Many that use Twitter’s site directly will likely not care that they can still retweet the old fashioned way–they’ll simply use the retweet option provided by Twitter. Third party apps still have their sensible versions of retweeting, so that is a welcome relief.

But the plight of the retweets for direct use of Twitter is something Twitter should remain aware of. In lieu of frequent changes made to basic processes on major networks like Facebook, the backlash from users and pundits can leave the networks a little bruised. Finding the balance between doing what’s best for the users while also respecting their wishes and feature requests is a task that only becomes more difficult as the user base grows.

For Twitter, the openness of its forum has been the blessing and the curse for its ability to maintain the core competencies of its product, as it lends itself to feature abuse rather readily. Further tweaking the retweet process may be in the best interest for Twitter in this case, however, as it seems that weeks later users still long for the unregulated use of the feature.