Calling Mashable´s bluff; if GooglePlus is a ghost town then Facebook and Twitter are Cemeteries

*Battle of the Social Networks – Who Will Win In Terms Of Interactions On The Same Published Story*?

+Mashable  has release another story about G+ being a site of "low activity" complete with Infograph stats that really make no sense. I'm frankly tired of these articles and pictures,  So today I did some resarch and made my very own pretty picture, comparing some articles that Mashable has published in the last 24 hours and how much Social Media buzz they got across the various networks. I bring you… 

What are the ACTUAL Interaction Results across Google+, Twitter and Facebook (with pictures and numbers) for the same story from Mashable?

STORY  :Would You Wear an Internet-Connected T-Shirt?… (also conveniently by Mr  +Todd Wasserman  who wrote this G+ ghost town article) –
Google+ Summary  –
• 810 +1s
• 415 Reshares
• 265 Comments (not including all the comments and plus ones from each of those 415 reshares of course) ….

Twitter Summary – (
• 32  Favorites
• 130 RT  
• 5  @Replies 

Facebook Summary – (

G+ hands down winner here.

Let's compare another one shall we? 

STORY  : Not on Facebook? Employers, Psychiatrists May Think You’re a Psychopath  –

Google+ Summary
• 386 +1s 
• 324 ReShares 

Twitter Summary – (
• 44  Favorites
• 120 RT 
• 2  @Replies

Facebook Summary – (

FB was close but over all G+ wins again! (Especially including the comments and +s on all 324 reshares)

These numbers were accurate as of the time of this post as you can see by clicking to enlarge the lovely graphic below . 🙂

I would REALLY like to stress that both Facebook and Twitter have various APIs that allow their numbers to be automated, for example Auto RT everything Mashable says. None of these are possible on G+ because there is NO personal write API. Real people are manually doing each one of these actions on the stats listed above on Google Plus. 

The point i am trying to stress here in bright clear numbers is that G+ has a way  higher level of engagement than the other two on the same story… How on EARTH can you post G+ has low engagement on your website when this site is actually giving you WAY better engagement?

I really hope someday soon we can stop seeing these link bait articles about how "dead and ghost town" Google plus it is. Its simply false sensationalized reporting.

If you are finding G+ a bit isolated, circle some more people, join a public hangout or gosh darn it try posting and commenting here once a day using some trending hashtags, pretty pictures and stuff you are interested in! 

It can be life changing experience to find your voice and make a noise here on G+.

#googleplus #twitter #facebook #ghosttown  

Calling Mashable´s bluff; if GooglePlus is a ghost town then Facebook and Twitter are Cemeteries

Google+: Reshared 46 times
Google+: View post on Google+

  1. Samantha Villenave says

    Good for you + Amanda Blain for calling them out over this. Linkbait is right! 🙂

  2. Steve McCartney says

    Loved the way you used their own stats against them. Excellent job!

  3. Liz ?uilty says

    I think its just trendy to make comments about how something sucks so you can get irate people posting about you publicizing your stupidity

  4. Dan Soto says

    + Amanda Blain While I don't agree with the Mashable article, you're missing one major factor as to why this was shared much more often on G+. It's because it was about G+…not Facebook, or Twitter.

  5. Liz ?uilty says

    + Dan Soto you assume things, but feel free to post some statistics on other stories

  6. Aaron Kasten says

    I USED to really like Mashable

  7. Ian Thomas says

    I know where the argument is coming from that G+ is a "ghost town"….  but if people would just follow the advice of many and actually put just a little bit of effort into it…..  sigh
    Great example – I'm not surprised in the least.

  8. Melissa Bagley says

    Thanks for taking the time to compare the numbers. It really does prove G+ is not a ghost town.

  9. Joseph Lee says

    What have you got to say for yourselves + Mashable?! 

  10. Dustin Rehmann says

    Bravo! + Amanda Blain Loved that you pulled all the numbers for a side by side comparison. And what you said at the end was perfect.

  11. Silner Wilner says

    The interesting thing I've noticed, + Dan Soto is: G+ stuff gets shared on G+ and Facebook stuff on Facebook, but everything still gets shared on Twitter. I'm not so much making a point here; I'm just making an observation

  12. Amanda Blain says

    Sorry what + Dan Soto I purposely picked a facebook positive article.. and one about Internet T-shirts… I did NOT use the G+ link bait article in my stats although im sure the numbers will end up in similar ball parks… 

  13. Chris Lang says

    I ain't afraid o' no ghosts!

    Typical Google bashing, went thru this with Gwave and Buzz, + Mashable makes money off advertising, that comes from traffic, and slanting posts to Facebook fanboys get traffic.

    AND they know all us G+ powerusers will turn out in droves to express our disagreement. So linking to them and commenting is what they are after + Amanda Blain Don't fall for their BS, I am not wasting any more time on them.

  14. Lincoln Innocent says

    Talk to them + Amanda Blain I don't know why they hate Google+ so much.

  15. Aaron Wood says

    I regularly see images and posts on FB that have over 100,000 likes and thousands of comments and shares. This is a VERY small example of interaction and who wins.

  16. Rob B. says

    + Dan Soto  Well if facebook had an os, a cell phone, or a cloud maybe facebook could have such posts but right now its just a glorified message board…

  17. Amanda Blain says

    No link to the garbage article at all in this post  + Chris Lang … specifically for this purpose.

  18. Brian Klippel says

    Mashable hates everything Google, they are on Apple's payroll.

  19. Mike Keller says

    Thank you so much for this + Amanda Blain ! I think Mashable has bias towards Facebook maybe.

  20. John Correa says

    Very cool info, keep on 'em! I'm so sick of the link bait articles too!

  21. Robin Hicks says

    Isn't that kinda like apples & oranges? What people find interesting on Facebook doesn't translate well to Google+!

  22. Dan Soto says

    + Liz ?uilty I'm only referring to the popularity of this article.  If you look at all the reshares of it, it's only because people, on G+, are feeling left out because of it.  The controversy is creating a ton more page views and such for Mashable here than on other networks.

  23. Clare Cosgrove says

    + Chris Lang I used to waste my energy…not anymore.. Google+ needs to be doing more to make people see that Google+ isn't what all these Ghost town blogging eejits are claiming. I am tired of doing their job for them and I have also seen that I am only promoting the eejits more if I do post…so I stopped and I sit back and wait to see if Google will ever start doing the job it has been leaving its users to do  without getting paid…that it should be doing itself!

  24. Silner Wilner says

    I'm repeating myself here, + Mike Keller But I actually think it's a bias born of laziness. These media outlets have worked hard to get their presence on Facebook and they don't want to have to start all over again. I can't blame them for that, but at the same time, I don't take them too seriously when they bash new networks

  25. George Cohn says

    Numbers are easy to throw around, they are so quantitative. I would love to see open and direct measurement of qualities like satisfaction, passion, relevance, and engagement.

  26. Farran Lee says

    I just hate everyone.

  27. AJ Kohn says

    Excellent work + Amanda Blain. What is also not really mentioned is that the +1 number is only the number of +1s from the original site and does not include +1s on those shares within Google+.

    This is different than the way Likes are calculated by Facebook where comments on a Like are added to the total.


  28. Amanda Blain says

    + Aaron Wood of course… and thats the only criticism someone could give this post. "Why those articles"… Although scanning the Mashable FB page.. i didnt find any post with 100,000 likes…  most show similar numbers to what I posted above.

    The point i am trying to stress here in bright clear numbers is that G+ has a way way way way way higher level of engagement than the other two on the same story… how on EARTH can you post G+ has low engagement on your website when this site is giving you WAY better engagement?

  29. Erik Collett says

    Say it loud, say it proud, Amanda. 😀 I get so angry when someone says that nothing happens here… then they send me links to news articles and videos that I saw 4 days earlier on Google+. *shakes head*

  30. sara mcmillan Samuel says

    normally cheap talk about a giant gets much publicity than that about a don`t get surprised some one picks on Google!

  31. Silner Wilner says

    Yeah G+ is definitely very fresh+ Erik Collett I guess being so close to Google Reader helps

  32. Mary Higgins says

    Meh, I saw this on Friendfeed earlier and didn't think much of it.

  33. Marcelo Hatti says

    Good one + Amanda Blain

  34. Anthony Genovese says

    Maybe it has just been my industry, but I have been having a tough time searching for #insurance  professionals. Starting to expand into general small business tips.  Need to dig up some articles on how to user G+ like a power user. Any recommendations?

  35. Michael Dubnik says

    The faster we ingore these click-bait articles, the sooner they will go away. We all know they are BS

  36. Amanda Blain says

    I did mention that + AJ Kohn  🙂  Twice actually 🙂

  37. Joseph Lee says

    Let's not forget the engagement on G+ is superior to that from Facebook or Twitter. We got Quantity and Quality here! 😉

  38. Silner Wilner says

    I'm not so sure, + Michael Dubnik Mashable have been posting Click bait for years and it works very well for them. I wish it wasn't so, but it is

  39. Michael Dubnik says

    + Silner Wilner Yeah… sadly you're right. It's a shame + Pete Cashmore allows this garbage to run.

  40. Charles Jaimet says

    "Journalists" love to take an accepted idea and rewrite the same story even after it ceases to be true. G+ has come out of its early adopter phase and is by far the most engaging social medium, imho.

  41. J.C. Kendall says

    + Amanda Blain 6 months ago, I would have gone medieval on Mashable like I did last year on Ben Parr, when he wrote that garbage about Google "not eating their own dog food". Now, I know not to give them pageviews. The game to them is click-throughs and also saving Facebook, which has already achieved walking-dead status. 

  42. Silner Wilner says

    I never like playing the superiority card, + Joseph Lee However, G+ has retained the real discourse crown for a while now 🙂

  43. David Shephard says

    Mashable writes garbage and repeats (that's their formula). Frankly I am getting tired of their top 5 reasons to… Etc.

    I was not a fan of G+ when it was first introduced. But it has blossomed to become the most elegantly designed social network with real people (mostly), and I have become quite enamored with it.

    Thanks +Amanda Blain for taking the time to put together a counter argument.

  44. J.C. Kendall says

    + Amanda Blain I should have mentioned, you did a very nice job on this. 

  45. AJ Kohn says

    It deserves to be mentioned more + Amanda Blain. Too few understand the social proof fudging that Facebook (and to a lesser degree Twitter) engage in.

  46. Claudia Sims says


  47. Amanda Blain says

    No where in this post did I link the "low engagement" article. No Link Bait from Me. 🙂 Instead I linked a Facebook Postive story(assuming it would have high facebook stats) and another one by the same author as the "low engagement" article that Marshable posted in the last 24 hours. 

  48. Silner Wilner says

    Yeah that's for sure, + David Shephard G+ is very well designed. In fact, Facebook practically admitted that, with their redesigned mimicry

  49. Fermin June III Alegro says

    Go G+!  Go + Amanda Blain !

  50. Max Huijgen says

    + Dan Soto the other story is about Facebook

  51. Max Huijgen says

    I shared it as Calling Mashable´s bluff; if G+ is a ghost town then FB and twitter are cemeteries + Amanda Blain but the reality is of course that all networks are very much alive. 
    It´s the depth that makes G+ so special, but your comparison on quantity was a good one.

  52. Dan Soto says

    + Max Huijgen yeah… I missed that she had included other stories as well :/

  53. Max Huijgen says

    tl;dr + Dan Soto 😉

  54. Chris Lang says

    Again, this is why they write these stories + Max Huijgen So you share them, it works everytime. When are you going to quit falling for their BS?

    I used to be the biggest offender on Buzz, they know we are ripe for the pickin… The only way the Google bashing posts stop is if we quit sharing and commenting on them.

  55. Amanda Blain says

    Oooo thats a good title + Max Huijgen 😀

  56. Silner Wilner says

    That's exactly right, + Max Huijgen All those networks match someone's needs best; none of them match everyone's needs. This One Network To Rule Them All is just a media invention. I don't know why we play along. OK I do; it's so much fun 🙂

  57. Eddie Mohan says

    Many thanx for the comparison + Amanda Blain! I still don't get why more of my friends ditch the other two social networks in favour of G+ seeing as the numbers do make sense.

  58. Aaron Wood says

    + J.C. Kendall walking dead status? You do know FB had 1.6 billion visits last week right? Compared to G+'s 34 million was it? I'm sure you've seen the post detailing that and everyone patting themselves on the back for beating… Pinterest.

    Come see me when the numbers get remotely close. Until then if you're going to refer to FB as undead, I'll gladly lump G+ in also with the ghost town status.

  59. Margie D Casados says

    + Aaron Wood When you factor in YouTube as a part of Google domains you will see that Google is neck and neck with Facebook.

    Now take a look at the future, YouTube integrated into Google+…

  60. Jesse Wojdylo says

    This does not surprise me at all + Amanda Blain.  I think all of us on Google+ who can actually type more than one sentence know how powerful this platform is.  I have met more amazingly brilliant people on Google+ in five months than I have on any other social network in three years!

  61. Wendy Haagen says


  62. Aaron Wood says

    Neck and neck, + Margie D Casados? YouTube had 560 million or so. Add in G+ and that's roughly 600 million. Facebook had one BILLION more visits than that. How is that even close to you? O.o

  63. J.C. Kendall says

    + Aaron Wood I could not care less how many visits Facebook has. They have no viable revenue model, and when the hype is over, Facebook is going to die. Their Mobile strategy is a complete joke, their architecture will not allow real-time relevance for their ad pokes, and the Facebook Exchange idea is such a violation of privacy, that I suspect users will revolt like never before. Yeah, I said dead, baby. I meant it. Facebook next year will either be a division of Apple or Microsoft, or it will be MySpace 2.0. 

  64. Amanda Blain says

    I dont care how many visits, users, whatever has… As a business owner I care how many eyeballs not only might possibly see stuff, but take some kind of action on it. Talk about it, share it, come back to it…  And G+ wins in this area. Hands Freaking Down.

  65. Eli Fennell says

    Awesome! Great work!

  66. Jesse Wojdylo says

    Oh + J.C. Kendall you act like you have done a power panel HOA on this subject lately!  

  67. Gabriel Maria Platt says

    Can`t you all quiet down a bit? I am afraid of the clowns (coming over from fb and twitter, that is)

  68. John Fanavans says

    umm + Amanda Blain, you're methodology is a bit lame to say the least.  Much love though.

  69. J.C. Kendall says

    + Jesse Wojdylo Whatchu talkin bout, Jesse?!?

  70. Silner Wilner says

    I was amazed the FB flotation was so overhyped and so overpriced, + J.C. Kendall Oddly enough, Twitter just might have a revenue model with their promoted tweets, annoying as they are, but they'll have to be able to deliver them to the client apps to really catch the advertisers

  71. George Heindel says

    Thanks + Amanda Blain for calling them out… I have today uncircled Mashable after commenting on the post as follows: #clickporn  

  72. Aaron Wood says

    People can see my art on a social platform and not interact with the post at all and still come buy my stuff. 😉

  73. John Fanavans says

    Mind you, so is comparing soc networks on the basis of shares. I wonder if + Vic Gundotra is right. People are just using G+ privately. I certainly use FB that way.

  74. Pål Basso says

    Great work + Amanda Blain 

  75. J.C. Kendall says

    + John Fanavans Private G+ activity is more than double public activity, from what I've heard internally from Google folks. 

  76. Silner Wilner says

    I rarely comment on art, + Aaron Wood There's not really much you can say. You either like it or you don't. Though I do make the effort sometimes 🙂

  77. Carlos Barajas says

    You tell them, way to go, Amanda!

  78. Silner Wilner says

    I'd vouch for that, + J.C. Kendall For a long while. I didn't make anything public. I'm not a very prolific poster, but there must be other shy people who are 🙂

  79. Silner Wilner says

    I'm quite a prolific commenter when the mood takes me though 🙂

  80. Dayrk Flaugh says

    Let's compare a post the lists everything that someone ate in the day, a picture of a lawn chair, someone's to-do list for the day, or some other mindless garbage. You'll get more Likes on Facebook and have trouble even finding such a post on G+.

    Sure, the different sites have different types of posts, but I'll take the content on G+ over Facebook any day!

  81. Daniel Junior says

    LOL… it doesnt even seem fair.. G+ community is far more interactive

  82. Anneliz Hannan says

    Nice job Amanda…you definitely are the G+ hero of the day and you did it with facts not hyperbole.

  83. John Eichten says

    Google + will win over the long term…..

  84. Amanda Blain says

    I'm really not sure why some people seem to think this is mindless… except they are not thinking of it from a business perspective. The number of engagements a company gets on their social media that they are likely paying someone to do.. is HUGE. It is how you track ROI.

    Even from a purely branding eyeball perspective + Aaron Wood Something shared 415 times compared to 97 times.. is a huge amount of difference in potential eyeballs. The amount of users on the networks is really irrelevant … it wont touch all of them no matter what you do.  If you can't see that based on the above numbers I'm not sure what to tell you. 

  85. Daniel Junior says

    This + Todd Wasserman must have low IQ… dont you guys at mashable know how to count??

  86. Dan Soto says

    + Daniel Junior or spell?

  87. Em Wells says

    Nice sleuthing  + Amanda Blain! I'm starting to wonder if sites like + Mashable are getting payed to bad mouth g+…. hmmm.

  88. M Monica says

    BTW, + Todd Wasserman has less than 10,000 people who have him in circles. I'm not sure he's entirely qualified to write the article.  The fact that all this data should have been available to him prior to writing it, and it's going to be making him look really bad at his job, should probably make + Mashable think twice about who they employ; this little post is going to raise some eyebrows, I think. Well done. 

  89. Max Huijgen says

    + Aaron Wood  a handy simplification to put + Amanda Blain´s point into perspective:
    Until the eighties AT&T had a sheer monopoly in US phone users and thus by far the highest number of users. However if you wanted to reach more than one person at a time even a small broadcaster would have been the better platform.

  90. narendra sable says


  91. Jean-Loup Rebours-Smith says

    + Mashable lost their credibility when they started reporting dumb stories from the daily mail imho.

    These days you just don't know what tech news agency you can trust anymore. There isn't one which isn't biased one way or another. Anyone care to prove me wrong? (please?)

  92. Michelle Marie says

    BTW + Mashable should not be sharing the same exact content across all three social media channels, it's considered spammy. 

  93. Alejandro Patrone says

    G+ is about engaging with your passions, FB is about engaging with your friends/family, Twitter is about the celebrity and current events. I think the mashable study didn't take that into account when it selected the stories in that study.

  94. M Monica says

    + Aaron Wood  I also am on the SUL, but I have pages as well which are not on the SUL, and which have less than 10,000 followers (Google Plus Book Club) and Google Plus Book Club regularly hits the What's Hot list due to the number of people who have it turned up in circles. In fact, it's easier for me to hit the What's Hot list on Google Plus Book Club than it is for me to hit it as M Monica, though M Monica has exponentially more followers than GPBC. 

    It's not just about being on the SUL; it's about influence, and the types of people who have you in circles, and also about engaging, new content. And about whether people have you in a circle they check regularly, or one they never check. 

    Also, you are confusing Amanda's content with Mashable's own content. She compared Mashable's own content and its results over a 24 hour period, not her own content (which, btw, is now hitting the What's Hot list on its own.) Your comparing that particular post not being shared really doesn't factor into this particular equation here. Have you considered that it's not new? Or that people have seen it before? Or that you are outright asking them to share it (which in my opinion, people don't like.)

  95. Amanda Blain says

    Best comment of this thread goes to + Michelle Marie 🙂 LOL

  96. Brian Chung says

    Great point + Amanda Blain ! Numbers don't lie

  97. Aaron Wood says

    + M Monica, yes, I was confused. I deleted my comparison post.

  98. J.C. Kendall says

    + M Monica "It's not just about being on the SUL; it's about influence, and the types of people who have you in circles, and also about engaging, new content. And about whether people have you in a circle they check regularly, or one they never check."  – Ditto this. 

    I will never be on the SUL, because I am too obnoxious to be popular to the masses, but few businesses that I know of are doing as well as mine is on Google+. I dont know if that means that I am influential, or not, but more than 90% of my business comes right off these pages. 

    Google creates relevant matches between buyers and sellers. Our friend + Terrence Lui is famous for receiving Facebook ads for Sperm Banks and Bail Bonds. Unless Terrance has a secret life I don't know about, Facebook has not a clue how to match a user to advertisements they would click on without a massive invasion of privacy.  

  99. Amanda Blain says

    I realize it was a long article folks.. but come now! This has nothing to do with the SUL or me and only to do with their posts. 🙂

  100. Sean Steinmarc says

    This is a great research piece and comparisons – THIS is what should be out there on blogs and news sites, not the same old (and incorrect) story!

  101. Jim Banks says

    yes + Michelle Marie hit the nail on the head. Copy/Paste has no place on any social network.

    Haters going to hate.

  102. Cameron Silva says

    The proof is in the pudding. 

    G+ FTW!

  103. Daniel Junior says

    + Morten Myrstad exposes a bunch of mistakes done by mashable.

  104. Richard Hayes says

    Great rebuttal.

  105. Kartik Negi says

    + Amanda Blain this comparison can only make sense if you list the follower/likes count of the profiles in g+,twitter and facebook.

  106. Donagh Reardon says

    Lets start talking about + Mashable behind its back and then see if they like it.

  107. Amanda Blain says

    Perhaps + Kartik Negi  There are many metrics involved in statistics, thats the point.  But with a difference between 457 shares, 120 RTS and 97 shares…  we are looking at a rather larger number of eyeballs being directed at the posts from G+ 

    The KEY point i am making here is the actual number amount of interactions  Argue total amount impacted all you want but G+ is the likely going to be the highest. We could also put in things like Search Plus Your World and the fact the posts are publicly indexed by the Biggest search engine in the world…  And so on.

    For simplicity… I simply highlighted the 'low engagement' here compared to the other sites. 

  108. su ann lim says

    + Amanda Blain Well done!  Enjoyed your comparative post.  I may have missed it but did anyone mention the fact that on G+ half our posting activity is not public and how about conversations in chats and hangouts? If taken into account your G+ stats are an understatement.
    As well, given the shoddiness of Mashable content, I support avoiding making them revenue by boycotting i.e. not clicking their site.

  109. Kartik Negi says

    + Amanda Blain In that case you might have taken the metric of % of total followers interacted. This would give a more clear idea of the engagement. 

    And keep in mind that by default facebook only gives a page/profile reach to only about 16% of total people liking it. So the % of total followers interacted in facebook would be obviously <16%. This does not mean facebook has low engagement, it is part of filtering by facebook's edge rank algorithm which dynamically changes the reach depending upon the response a post gets from 16% reach. And google+ officially has no such reach limit(probably because it fees it does not require filter at this stage) and that is the reason you are seeing more eyeballs. So don't get fooled from those numbers which you have got.

    Thus a more fair and sensible metric would be to compare the % of total users signing in daily and average amount of time spent by each user. And g+ shy's away to give that metric for g+ as it feels that the whole google is covered in this social layer. I hope it makes sense to you.

  110. Amanda Blain says

    Umm.. all sorta valid points + Kartik Negi but again.. from a company perspective I really dont care about the limits facebook puts on my audience, or how many sign in there each day, or worse yet how much time they spend on the network. NONE of those numbers impact MY companies bottom line… They impact FB bottom line. They dont see my post longer, more or whatever. They are irrelevant stats.

    I care about the end results of how many people actually see, touch and interact with something. MY ROI.  I'm not sure why you think those other stats have any merit at all.  

  111. Graeme Duncan says

    Well done Amanda

  112. Jim Banks says

    + Donagh Reardon that's exactly what they want you to do, controversy drives readership, which drives viral activity, which drives revenue through advertising. 

    Linkbait 101
    Mashable (and others to be fair) zig when others zag

  113. Gerry Roe says

    +Dan Soto – I think you're confusing two stories. One is the story to which Ms Blain was responding, the story about Google+, the other is the story on which she ran the numbers, a story about a programmable T-shirt.

  114. Donagh Reardon says

    +Jim Banks Exactly, we do that, then they will do what we all know what they are going to do. And because they know we know that they know that we know that they know. We know that eventually that all this will……… I forgot my point.
    I'm quite drunk at the moment.
    If the above makes any sense, I apologize.  

  115. Jen Walker says

    I have not had a lot of #Google+ experience Amanda ,but I do find that Facebook has been out for awhile,too many problems,and most people have moved on from that site.I deleted my FB account years ago.

    Twitter was a fave site of mine,but due to issues with my rising popularity I was forced to delete my account,but made great friends and entertainment contacts there.

    However #Google + has really grown on me,and I notice this site is great for immediate exposure,especially from some companies you would not neccessarily get a follow from on Twitter.

    I have only been here a few months,but I notice I am getting noticed,and that is great,because although I do like commenting on posts,I am mostly here for networking purposes for employment.

    And #Google + has given me hope as a writer in such a short amount of time,compared to when I was on Twitter.

    So I am excited to see how this site can change my life and enrich it even more.

    Thanks for the post.:)

  116. Melody Migas says

    Awesome post! Thanks for doing and sharing it. 

    As I said on another post, I'd never heard of Mashable until I was on G+. 

  117. Kartik Negi says

    + Amanda Blain Again you are not getting the gist here. The metric i mentioned was to measure USAGE of the service by its USERS. And not for ROI. Facebook is there because majority of people(who signed up) uses it. ROI comes when you have INVESTMENT. Here there is no investment.

     But i guess what you meant is the amount of activity you get on your (same)post in all 3 networks. Well for that too, again as i mentioned in above comment you cannot compare it directly due to the difference in the reach of % of total followers in facebook and other networks. And even if the % reach of total followers is equaled it still in any way cannot be measured using your metric, because you need to take into consideration the total no of followers you have in each page and thus you should take "% of followers interacted"

    As a matter of fact, you metric above is totally insensible and you will also agree with that when you will know that both the post which you are talking about in this post are/were on G+'s What's Hot List and thus gaining the reach of millions of more peoples's stream who have not yet circled mashable. Do you still think this is fair comparison? Not at all! So shall we compare another post which is not on what's hot list of g+ like the "gmail Looking for beta testers"?

    I won't list the stats here but you can see the stats by yourself and see the difference. And keep in mind that the stats of facebook are only of 16% of 963K people who like mashable on fb(and still it wins). If you multiply those stats by 6X then you can get the exact figure of facebook interaction(with 96% reach compared to 100% in g+) in comparison to google+. Your comparison is just fooling you and others as well.

  118. Ian Thomas says

    The other way to look at it of course is….. Shhhhhhh…. Don't tell anyone about Google+, all the cool people are here.

  119. Amanda Blain says

    Ah.. and now you DO get the gist + Kartik Negi … People can make stats and posts and do whatever they like.. and it makes no lick of difference at the end of the day 🙂

    I do still think my stats are valid. 🙂 The amount of interactions regardless of whats hot or facebook limiting post doesnt matter on ROI.  You've miss read at least 5 times when I said from a business perspective these stats are all that matter.

    Thanks again for arguing with such passion to a complete stranger on the internet that you don't even circle. I wish you good day. 🙂

  120. Donagh Reardon says

    + Amanda Blain  Your right "People can come up with statistics to prove anything Ken, 14% of all people know that."-Homer Simpson

  121. Matt Jones says

    Kick ass analysis + Amanda Blain , seems to mirror my own experiences.

    G+ = unique and mostly interesting content, which can be easily tuned with circles.
    FB = tons of crap I have no desire to see, everything is opt-out, too many duckfaces
    Twitter = personally I never really "got it", 140 characters? Seriously, why?

  122. shahid afzal says

    u  call   me  00923477191826

  123. shahid afzal says

    i love  you

  124. sara mcmillan Samuel says

    i been trying to even reason out the possibilty of any quality in that attack on my no one interaction media until i realized am looking for non existing possibilities! to hale with it, lets keep this connection so high guys bravo G+

  125. Jim Banks says

    Just another quick observation, fwiw.

    The spread of social activity will be largely in proportion to the demographic of the typical user of a site and the content. 

    I am sure a lot of us have alerts set up to notify us when a topic is written about, and human nature is to share it with the community that we think are "like us", so an article about Google+ will get more love from Google+ users.

    I was just reading this article over at + Forbes (after the annoying 20 second ad break – no geo-targeting for me in the UK, but I digress)

    Because it is Forbes, the number of LinkedIn shares is proportionally higher than it would be if it was TMZ

    It's almost on a par with the number of Facebook shares.

    I am sure that is because many people have Forbes bookmarked and then LinkedIn is a natural onward journey.

  126. Amanda Blain says

    There are lots of valid points to alter statistics and how they have meaning and merit and value will depending on many many things. 

    *The point of this post – How on EARTH can a company post G+ has low activity on their website when this site is actually giving them WAY more activity*?

  127. Joseph Lundine says

    Facebook, Twitter, Mocospace, Myspace, G+, etc all of them serve the same purpose, sharing ideas, pictures, posting random comments, news articles does it really matter which site gets more vistors?

  128. Mike Coles says

    You can't comment on a Mashable post by authenticating w/ G+ credentials, only FB and Twitter.

    Their posts are going to have an obvious bias.

  129. Ronnie Bincer says

    + Amanda Blain Shared to more peeps on  Our Super busy little Ghost Town ?

  130. Jure Klepic says

    + Amanda Blain on the end all that matters is the revenue increase that you see on your balance statement…So any good case study that would proof the point that G+ does drive revenue for business? I solid one i mean…. 

  131. Amanda Blain says

    Indeed + Jure Klepic  🙂 id also like to see one for Facebook and Twitter while we are at it 🙂

  132. Jure Klepic says

    + Amanda Blain Dell published several do did Intel and Coca Cola for FB for twitter i can tell you that + Robert Caruso can speak about it, his business is driven by Twitter… I am not trying to argue with you but did not see any solid case study published by any brand that would show a positive ROI on G+. Personally i get way more engagement on Twitter or FB vs G+ my G+ engagement level is close to zero LOL

  133. Amanda Blain says

    I could help you with that + Jure Klepic  🙂 Starting with Posting Public… instead of Extended Circles…  but yes… You also likely spend way more time On Twitter or FB… Doesn't mean things are not happening here. You likely spent a bunch of time learning what worked and what didn't on both those systems too 🙂 How much have you invested here? I digress… I'll look into the reports/people you posted… I am interested in seeing them. 🙂

  134. Jure Klepic says

    + Amanda Blain Well see I learned something already post public, i was under impression that all you post on G+ was public posting…well will take this advice first… I did spent quite a while on very beginning and then i just gave it up, but maybe is time to get back in the game 🙂 

  135. Amanda Blain says

    Nope currently only friends of people you circle… Friends of Friends can see your posts. Depending on how many you are circling.. its probably not very many. 🙂 Everyone else would see a mostly blank profile 🙂

  136. Jaana Nyström says

    + Amanda Blain  Woohoo, you show them gurl!  🙂  Good stuff, thanks!  
    Why do they do this? Mashable, TechCrunch, Forbes…  Just linkbaiting?  So stupid.

    I've stopped reading and sharing all these trashrags. If they are so wrong about Google+, perhaps they are as wrong on many other subjects…

  137. edurado perez tolentino says


  138. Yoshiko Fazuku says

    Why doesn’t every one just remove mashable from their circles. They don’t believe we are on here anyways.

  139. Miguel R. Rodríguez says

    Let me say: IN YOUR FACE !

  140. Laurence Hubbard says

    Killer post + Amanda Blain… game, set, match!
    Ever thought of becoming a lawyer? 🙂

  141. Ahmed Zeeshan says

    Excellent article + Amanda Blain. Goes to show big names in the world of social media like + Mashable don't actually know much about Social Media -_-

  142. Kelvin Williams says

    I remember in the early days + Pete Cashmore was all Google+ is the Cat's Pajamas.  I was forced to read it because well there was no one else around.  But as soon as my stream got busy, I de-circled.

    Wonder why the attitude shift at + Mashable…  Do they not use Google+ anymore?  Because, at least for me, I can't envision using something else.  I find myself rarely logging into Facebook for that perpetual high school reunion and I only log into Twitter when there's a big news event (I hope within a few months that type of activity will be here, it's the APIs + Google, give them APIs!).

    Maybe they're just bitter because they bought FB shares on opening day…

  143. Kelvin Williams says

    + Amanda Blain you know, you should have really searched Mashable for "Facebook" and "Google+."

    It seems to me that Mashable treats Google the way FOX News treats Obama.  A quick look at the search results finds, "Facebook: Better for the Planet than Google" and many other glowing write ups about Facebook.  While Google's articles are a lot less glowing and often depict it as a desolate wasteland like in the article "Should your Business be on Google+" (

    Anyone want to make a bet that either Mashable's top dogs bought FB shares or are kissing ass in hopes to be acquired by Facebook?  

    After all, for all his early love of Google+ why can't I login to Mashable with my Google account–at the time of this writing only Facebook and Twitter were options.

    Piss on 'em.  I happen to like it down here in this desolate wasteland with all you apparently extremely bored geeks (that's their words, not mine).  🙂

  144. Yifat Cohen says

    Thanks for doing this + Amanda Blain! Finally. 

  145. Erik Andersson says

    Listening in.

  146. Rehan Ahmad says

    Bravo + Amanda Blain ?

  147. Max Huijgen says

    The + Kartik Negi / + Amanda Blain debate misses two arguments:
    – for a business owner passive consumption is less interesting than actionable content. Commenting is where G+ excels, so a way higher engagement than the +/like button. 
    – Kartik says there is no ROI as there is no investment. Can you check my profile or that of + Amanda Blain or ten thousands of others on G+. I see a considerable investment in time and time is money. 
    Like + J.C. Kendall says G+ is a highly effective professional networking tool, but only if you invest in it. 

  148. Ayoub Khote says

    Mashable will not write a positive article about G+ because they're not seeking to report facts, but to cause controversy and get people to link to them.

  149. Morgan Abbou says

    Great initiative + Amanda Blain !

  150. Khaledrefat Refat says


  151. Khaledrefat Refat says


  152. Ricardo Martins says

    Great post! These "low activity/low engagement" stories about G+ are really annoying. And I must add that, on G+ you feel more likely to comment, share and re-share. Magic maybe, but also you engage more because others on G+ engage more. =)

  153. Guillermo Ramos says

    + Amanda Blain Thanks for your passion! I enjoy your post! 😉

  154. Gabby Person says

    G+ is awesome cuz the people on it are sociable and never rude (at least tht ive experienced). Plus, if your a fan of international stars, they seem to use G+ a lot too ^.^

  155. William vr says

    G+ is the best… G+ will win

  156. Manish Shinde says

    what a video……………..

  157. Howard Suissa says

    80% of the likes on FB were clickbots…

  158. Brian Cantor says

    Do people not realize that Mashable is a massively skewed sample for considering social media usage stats?

  159. Faisal Ahmed says

    Hi Amanda, this is faisal how r u? nice and looking good, will try and keep you posted on it…

  160. Nguyen Tran says

    Toi chag hieu lam hi ve van de nay

  161. Prashant Kushwaha says

    looking hot….

  162. Adriane Sudario says


  163. James Bedell says

    Hey guys…I signed up for G+ when it first launched just as I did with Twitter…for me personally I found much more engagement via twitter. I've tried countless times to get some engagement started here and it's just fallen flat. I'm not trying to rain on the G+ parade, but when it comes to conversation, in my experience twitter beats G+ by a mile.

  164. ohmponk syaraf says


  165. Nick Kuchinski says

    It's funny that Google will end up owning the social media playing field since they know how to deal with bots and spam!

  166. Sina Mohabat says

    I absolutely agree, google+ seems to hands down have Facebook and twitter beat, and I'm a brand new user.

  167. Christine Rodriguez says

    I love google + it's like Facebook and twitter got together and had a baby on steroids

  168. samaneh barakchian says

    hi amanda

  169. Rogan Burns says

    i f^cking love you for this share + Amanda Blain !!!!!! 😀
    G+ ALL THE WAY!!!

  170. Grover Usero says

    That article is the reason I made a G+ account. I just made an account a while ago… G+ all the way!!!

  171. Marc Pitman says

    Thanks Amanda! I'm really intrigued by how many people keep announcing the death of Google+. We must really intimidated FB!

  172. Filippo Salustri says

    It's apples & oranges anyways.  G+ isn't intended to develop the same kind of network structure as FB or T.  Saying G+ is better than (or worse than) FB is rather like saying milk is better than (or worse than) feldspar.

    + Amanda Blain While I like your sentiment, the numbers you propose – which I have no doubt are correct – are still statistically insignificant.  You would have to randomly sample thousands of stories that appear in all 3 networks to get any sense of what's going on.  You would probably want to also do deeper analysis, like trying to – for each of the thousands of stories – count comments that are essentially only a 'like' or +1 as the latter only; you'd want to separate real comments from the obvious trolls; you might even want to try to measure the "success" of ripples (and their equivalents in FB & T) by figuring how often a post is re-shared with respect to the sizes of the circles into which they're re-shared….  And that's just off the top of my head.

    Of course, this also means that the original Mashable post was really just more mash.  The pretty pictures they added are just "putting lipstick on a pig."

  173. Rod Myers says

    + Amanda Blain You are spot on in your analysis, imho. I'm very active in my #homebrew and #craftbeer circles, but the ghostwriter (aka social media pro) for my local craft brewer ignores G+. It aggravates me because she posts photos, for example, to FB that I can't access. Yet there is a passionate community of craftbeer lovers on G+ who actively promote their beer. I think she just doesn't understand G+.

  174. Benjamen Meiers says

    Do people still read mashable?

  175. David Lewis says

    Thank you for doing this work. Perhaps there is a conspiracy to deceive public about G+ which is funded by vested interests at FB and Twitter.

  176. Scott Melice says

    The potential is still not even fully trapped in G+ yet

  177. John Spade says

    I'm predicting a MySpace comeback in 2013 if only for hipster retro.

  178. Chand Hamal Thakuri says

    Before putting the emphasis on the fact, someone else should look at yourself + Mashable 

  179. Rob Michael says

    I'm surprised + Mashable hasn't chimed in on this post. Do they know how this place works?

  180. Silner Wilner says

    + Rob Michael Yeah, but… away from their own franchises, Mashable aren't actually that interactive. They like us to come to them; they rarely come to us. They're not very democratic really

  181. Amanda Blain says

    How much time are you spending on twitter per day… how much on G+ + James Bedell … I can guess the answer 🙂

    + Filippo Salustri i understand there are 200 comments here so ill repeat what i said 10+ times through the comments… 

    "How on EARTH can you post G+ has low engagement on your website when this site is giving you WAY better engagement" Even 1% of the time as shown here… 🙂 (although its higher than that)

    Sure its not a scientific study… none of these posts and articles are … That is also the pigs lipstick pretty picture.. point 😉

  182. Eric Warren says


  183. Eric Warren says

    Nice stats, + Amanda Blain . Sorry I came late to the party, but + Guy Kawasaki sent a link to your post in Email (that's that thing we used to use before G+ (LOL) and I just read the post and comments.

  184. M Monica says

    The fact that this post is still going should prove the point. 

  185. James Bedell says

    + Amanda Blain well that's kind of a chicken and egg question. Sure is spend more time on twitter but with over 4K followers and real discussion and engagement its hard to make more time for another social network, especially when I share content and there isn't much reaction.

  186. Zaki Adra says

    You're so beautiful. When you make up your mind to spend sometime abroad; just let me know. I'll be so happy to receive you as my guest here in Damascus. Zaki Youssef Adra

  187. Amanda Blain says

    Not really a chicken egg question + James Bedell  You can see SOME people getting results here on G+… You had to spend a bunch of time building up 4k of people in Twitter. If you invest time here they will come. And a lot easier and faster with better results than they do on Twitter. that is a fact

  188. Alex M Payne says

    Maybe I missed this in the comments, but why choose to use the posts that Mashable shared on their social networks.  Mashable posts on each place to drive traffic back to the page; that's the only engagement that they care about, the other engagements are secondary. The numbers aren't tracking sharing from the article itself, they are measuring Mashable's online audience. 

    According to Umpf the infographic was conducted by looking at the share counter on 100 online news stories. If you did the same method to the Facebook pyschopath story: Facebook has 9.9K shares compared to Twitter's 5.6K shares, LinkedIn's 685 shares and Google+'s 547 shares.

  189. James Bedell says

    + Amanda Blain I wouldn't say it's a fact. It's your opinion. To be honest the only conversations I've ever seen pick up traction here are conversations about tech and social media.

    I've come to the opinion that Facebook, Tumblr, G+, Twitter, pinterest instagram etc are all just ways of sharing what you're thinking about. None is really inherently better. What I tell people is try them all and pick the network(s) you enjoy most and engage there.

    After all if you were talking to even .1% of any of them you'd have an awful lot to say.

  190. Jonas Tirunas says

    .. Google Plus. You're special in my heart. Always. No matter what they say <3.

  191. IQ Test says

    853 IQ Test 08981685 kostenloser iq test 992994621 35522 iq test kostenlos 9329493441 IQ Test 26326465 iq test kostenlos 025116116 72924 iq test kostenlos 0660733168 IQ Test 12808341 iq 759223375 65164 iq test kostenlos 0875519112 IQ Test 63729745 iq test kostenlos 201625171 71647 iq test kostenlos 4180998145 IQ Test 06944570 intelligenztest 209187161 37741 iq test kostenlos 6766001433 IQ Test 23818071 intelligenztest 324942797 55396 iq test kostenlos 1211078

Leave A Reply

Your email address will not be published.