Another "Google+ is Dead" article. Really?

It seems to me when things seem not so great on the surface, someone (and I mean a lot of people) like to throw around headlines saying this or that is dead. Authors do this, like this one on Slate, to get attention and clicks. Fine by me! However, you better have enough arrows in your quiver to actually kill it.

The Slate article I linked to above brings up a lot of good points on why Google is not doing as well as it should. Brand pages were a pretty decent slip up from the get go. Google should have been clear about what the limitations were for a closed beta. Though, being in beta, confusion should be expected. To expect it to be a finalized product ready to head to the races, is not a good litmus for the service's success. Also, the whole real name vs. pseudonym mix up has been had by each of the major networks and continues to be a debate today.

Okay, so let me break this down:

The first charge volleyed at Google in that article is in regards to user activity. This has been brought up time and time again, yet has little bearing on real activity. Public posts do not equal all activity on Plus. Until Google releases the information, we don't know how much activity is going on within people's more private circles. Additionally, who cares if Page, Brin or Schmidt are actively posting on Google+. Look at Zuckerberg on Facebook: With more than 9 million subscribers he has exactly zero posts. Also, it helps to have active users in your circles. I've circled a few bloggers and, for some of them, I will see over 100 comments on their posts in less than an hour.

Next, Circles is not for friends only. In fact, as I've watched Plus grow, it has become clear to me that the way people use Circles is to curate a stream on a specific topic or to get information from a specific group of people. For example, I have all of my friends in the friends circle. There is not much need for me to break it down further than that. I also have a family circle and a work circle. All good, though activity from these circles is not high. My most-used circles are my Tech News, Usability, Photography and Humor circles. I've populated them with the most active and influential people in each category. Now I have rich, topic driven streams of information. I can quickly find things I'm interested in reading/seeing, and then I can reshare them so my friends and followers who have circled me can see the things I'm into. Google+ is not Facebook and is not about friends; get over it.

The main thing people seem to overlook with Google+ is its pervasiveness. Think of all the Google products you use. Android, Search, Maps, Blogger, Docs, YouTube, Calendar, Gmail and the rest are all going to be tied into Google+. Google has got the slow boil down to an art form. You will see Plus show up more and more in the various Google products that millions of people use every day. It will become unavoidable as it becomes more useful in tying all of your digital productivity together.

Maybe the whole saying "[this or that] is dead" is dead.