google buzz kill


Google’s Testing and Launch Procedure for Buzz

Usually I’m a Google fanboy. I live inside of my Reader, store most everything in Docs, broadcast my location with Latitude, hardly touch those other search engines (or whatever silly name they’re calling themselves today), and I’ve been a Gmail user since 2006. If Google builds it, I try it.

But Buzz is threatening my fandom… because Buzz is ruining my experience in the other products – specifically, Gmail and Google Reader.

First off, my inbox is a terrible place for Buzz. I like to get shit done in there, not casually browse the pithy complaints and LOLcat attached musings of my friends from Twitter. I’ve already got an app for that, it’s called TweetDeck. My Gmail behavior is akin to a seabird plummeting from the sky to the ocean’s surface and firing away with a satiated gullet. Gmail is not a particularly suitable environment for social domesticity.

Let’s ignore for a moment that when I activated Buzz I was following dozens of people I didn’t want to follow and had many accounts already churning out content for which I’d rather not connect to my overall profile. Last night, wanting to dig around my sent mail items looking for a specific communiqué (one that I didn’t remember enough salient details to go immediately to search), I realized that my sent mail box is now full of my Buzz items – everything that’s been automatically piped through to my account. This made my hunt much more difficult and annoying. The best name for this type of emotional response is technoyed.

Then I went to my Reader for a momentary fix of interesting and was alerted that now all of my Buzz followers were followers inside of Reader – and wouldn’t I like to follow them all back in the Reader environment?

No. I would not.

My relationship to members of my social graph is predicated on context. That context, in our digital world, is often based around technological platforms as well as degrees of familiarity. And that context is not meaningless or devoid of function.

I have profiles across the web not solely because I have to, but because that varied context provides value for me (the context in which you get to know me on LinkedIn is different from that of Tumblr, and that difference is meaningful). Moreover, when a user does the work needed to find me across the web, that says something about their interest; that work is meaningful to me. And if I accept that connection, especially on multiple platforms, it says something about my relationship to that person.

As danah boyd put it,

Social technologies that make things more efficient reduce the cost of action. Yet, that cost is often an important signal. We want communication to cost something because that cost signals that we value the other person, that we value them enough to spare our time and attention.


Or, in sandwich science terms, just because I love peanut butter and jelly does not mean I’d like you to invent a combination paste product of the two, which I’ll dub nut jelly.

The portal wars have now become the social wars – but services built to funnel our robust social graphs must learn how to preserve the heterogeneous qualities, not remove them.

What makes my relationship with you special might be platform specific, and that special quality should be preserved. The few people I share content with inside Google Reader are precious and I have no interest in diluting their awesomeness with, for that context, strangers.

I’m not quite ready to hit the eject button for Buzz, but if you are, here’s how.

Related posts:

  1. google wave and the end of the destination web
  2. my absence may kill you
  3. twitter vs the google zeitgeist



5 Responses (add your comment)

  1. Good post. Your point about varied context is dead on, I take pride in being able to differentiate and compartmentalize. It actually increases not just the utility, but the joy, of using all the great services the social web has to offer. Part of what made Google so great in the first place was its simplicity. Like a lot of people, I chose Gmail because, unlike Yahoo or AOL, I wasn’t bombarded with AP news story feeds, reality show results, a ton of advertising, and all sorts of corporate noise. So why would I be interested in being inundated by social noise in that very same environment that I wanted to be clean in the first place?

  2. I love it. “Nut jelly” perfectly describes what Buzz is! By combining email, Twitter, etc, it’s somehow the worst of all those worlds instead of the best.

    Does anybody love Buzz? I don’t know these people. I’d be fascinated to know why, if they do.

  3. Well said, Bud.

  4. Pasqualina Petruccio February 25, 2010
    at 5:19 am

    Excellent post.

    Thank you for articulating what l have being staying since the dreaded ‘Buzz’ reared its ugly head.

    As a great fan of simplicity of gmail and limitation Twitter, l do not want a combination of the two, and l certainly do not want others to read what l am reading, if l want to share then, l will use twitter; Buzz is gmail /Twitter marriage made in hell.

    Logan – yes l believe the ‘oh it’s new, so a thing must have, regardless’ over at Mashable are the only ones l know that are using and extolling the virtues Buzz, the rest of the world seems somewhat disinterested.

Trackbacks:

donate your two cents

Formatting: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>




recent comments

must reads / popular posts

links for strategic planners

Collecting the most shared content from planners and strategists...