Google Plus actually surpassed Twitter?
For statistics on the use of social networks, there are basically two methods. The first is to rely on figures provided by specialized institutions, which implement techniques to determine the number of users in different social networks. The downside is that their sources are less accurate than the sites concerned directly. Arguably, in most cases, these agencies have the advantage of being more neutral, although they are not all objective: some then offer services related to certain social networks, and the temptation to boost the interest of these sites may remain.
Google+, a social network underestimated?
In this regard, the consulting firm Global Web Index has released its own figures. Social networks were analyzed during the month of December 2012 and the results are as follows.
In terms of monthly active users, Google would place on to the second place. Behind Facebook, but before Twitter and other social media usual. Dustn.tv , who made this visualization, preferred exclude YouTube, which ranks in third place according to Global Web Index.
According to the agency, Facebook would tend to exaggerate its numbers: more than 700 million active users were counted in December, while the billion is frequently cited by the teams of Mark Zuckerberg. For Twitter and Google+, the situation is reversed: official figures would be understated, according to Global Web Index.
Overall, apart from this remarkable breakthrough of Google+, there is a high proportion of Chinese social networks , rarely highlighted: Qzone, Sina Weibo and Tencent to name a few. But Global Web Index emphasizes the decline of these platforms: small to small, local social networks tend to die, especially because of censorship and surveillance , more stringent regulations on social networks in China.
In the past six months, the number of Twitter users would have jumped 40% to about 30% and 25% for Facebook Google+. Conversely, some local sites such as Copains d'Avant (-10%), Tencent Weibo (55%) or MeinVZ (60%) tend to lose many users.
These statistics are credible?
In this regard, the firm Global Web Index seems no more inclined to favor a social network rather than another, even if the agency has figures tend to offer quite generous compared to other institutes of analysis for Google+. Because at the same time, the agency points to the incentive almost authoritarian Google, which tends to force the hand of its members, in some cases (creating a Gmail account automatically resulting in the creation of an account Google+, for example). fact is that regardless of the method used to encourage people to use Google+, they respond favorably, given the increase in the number of active users.
Also, it is interesting to rely on figures published by a third party agency, analyzing several social networks: methodology is the same for all social networks presented, while in the official figures, methods and definitions used are sometimes very different.
The second way to obtain statistics on the social networks is therefore to rely on official figures provided directly by the sites in question. The main advantage is that they are best placed to know the exact activity on their networks. But they can also inflate the figures to embellish reality. Based on these "official" data, here are the top 5 obtained (in terms of monthly active users, MAU):
Some networks known as Twitter , LinkedIn and Google+ are not part of this ranking. The first two claim "officially" about 200 million active users monthly, against 135 million for Google+ . Compared to statistics provided by Global Web Index, Facebook, Qzone and Sina Weibo would therefore tend to inflate the figures generously: one might expect. Official figures on Twitter and Google+ are quite recent: they date from December. Statistics relayed by Global Web Index are quite amazing. It is hard to imagine websites underestimate their own usage data. The Agency recognizes and 2.5 times more active members of the Google+ count made directly by Google.
The other downside to provide these figures on methodology: it is not clearly displayed. Apparently, it consist of a synthesis of different online surveys . The size of the survey population is not known, we just know that it is bounded by a broad age range, 16 to 64 years. Segmentation explaining the differences between official figures and those provided by Global Web Index on Facebook, according to Brett Petersen.
Finally, if social networks often indicate clearly their own definition of "active user" (and this is significant, including Google+ playing the card of transparency at this level), that is used by the agency rather vague and that is unfortunate. A clear methodology and a precise definition of the notion of "active user" would have allowed these figures to be more recognized.
In any case, and whatever the actual figures, Google+ welcomes many users often minimized. And they like to show they are active and well represented . Google's strategy, although the limits of authoritarianism seems to bear fruit, little-by-little. And you, what do you think? Which network do you use most? Have you given up for Twitter Google+ or vice versa? Or would you prefer to use both networks, but for different purposes?
Share This:
Jillur Rahman
I'm Jillur Rahman. A full time web designer. I enjoy to make modern template. I love create blogger template and write about web design, blogger. Now I'm working with Themeforest. You can buy our templates from Themeforest.
No Comment to " Google Plus actually surpassed Twitter? "