What does Google+ offer that other social networks don't?

[PenguinManiac]

Google+ has always looked like a weird platform to me. It's never taken off as people expected it to, it features groups with large reach that often fail to get the traffic you wish, and yet it's run by one of the biggest technology companies of all time. I guess that's the only reason people still try to use it.
However, conceptually speaking, it's not all that bad. You have universal accounts you can use to get interesting feed from groups, it's basically like having an RSS feed tied to your Google account... or is it?

Is there really any feature Google+ has that other social media platforms lack, or is the Google in Google+ the only reason why people are still pushing it?

 

[nesir]

Well there are many advantages actually , you know the knowledge panel on a google search right? and also the local 3 pack ?

How do you get ranked on those appearing on the first page even if your site doesn't?

Well the information for those places are derived mainly from 3 sources , google my business, your google brand account all of which require..... google+. So yea there is a great use for it.

Its google owned so you can bet like YouTube as a social platform any information on your site there will count more in a seo perspective than any other platform like fb, Instagram or twitter.

 

[SEOPub]

SEOPub

That is definitely not true.

 

[nesir]

I assume you agree with where the knowledge panels and local pack data is drawn from since you did not argue it. anyway i have personally kept myself in the top three through google plus my businesses and my brand account..... Since doing this my traffic to my site has increased ... due to ranking higher than the number one page..... now since traffic and click through rate do play a role in rankings my ctr is higher since im ranked higher and therefore my site on itself gets an seo increase. I dont see facebook or instagram or twitter giving any kind of boost in the same manner as they're effects on local pack or knowledge panel is minimal.... so indirectly it does.

Thinking that google wouldn't do something to make their own platforms worth more and used more by people and yield better search results you are being naive ... they are a corporation . twitter has on occasion been in crawlable by google , google didnt care... Theyve mentioned trust issues with profile with facebook , that is cause to not give facebook any real kind of ranking power. This is also why facebook has now started incorporating a authority factor on profiles. Instagram which is constantly facing account hacking issues ( google even drops your own site if you are hacked) .

I dont ever see vimeo results popping up on my searches youtube yes ... if you are about seo, you are about spreading your product or brand. the more awareness and positive engagement the better your initial ranking.....

 

[SEOPub]

That article is awful and full of a ton of BS.

There is a reason that YouTube results show up in search and not Vimeo. Because YouTube has way more authority. Videos get linked to way more often. It was that way BEFORE Google bought YouTube. Nothing new there.

And no Google is not going to give preference to Google+ and other properties they own over other sites as far as SEO is concerned because that would just encourage spammers.

Also the knowledge panel is often times taken from Wikipedia instead of a Google My Business or Google+ page. Google does not own Wikipedia.

The thing that you are really missing though is that social sites are pretty much all worthless for SEO. Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, etc. They have no special value in rankings.

 

[nesir]

There is a reason that YouTube results show up in search and not Vimeo. Because YouTube has way more authority. Videos get linked to way more often. It was that way BEFORE Google bought YouTube. Nothing new there.

Age is not a single defining factor in authority , More linked videos you say is also part of its authority? Isnt that exposure? As in the knowledge panel .... which would return back to your main site.... Any links , engagement , business that you attain form the knowledge panel if used correctly will reflect and boost your site appearance that is not on the local pack or knowledge panel....

And no Google is not going to give preference to Google+ and other properties they own over other sites as far as SEO is concerned because that would just encourage spammers.

It already has by making 3 entities withing google plus the part of the deciding factor for local packs or knowledge panel....excluding wikipedia

The thing that you are really missing though is that social sites are pretty much all worthless for SEO. Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram, etc. They have no special value in rankings.

I dont agree with that , because ive seen many people make valuable connections through social media sit increasing thier rankings... in the case of facebook or linkedin or pinintrest maybe not directly but indirectly by meeting and working with niche influences. Whom have the ability to give you that direct seo boost you want.

Why do you think the entire business world spends so much time on social events and networking? you would be a fool to think online where any different.

With that said op is free to try what he wants i no longer wish to argue this with you , you are entitled to your opinion

 

[denverdonate]

Why G+?

Integration into their other popular services. Google has YouTube and there just isn't a way even someone like Facebook could weave a Facebook account into something like that. For example, I use Gmail to register for a Yahoo account...Google would never let their services be used by Facebook to register on a Google service....they are literally the big dogs in social media and information online.

 

[ellastien]

Google+ has always looked like a weird platform to me. It's never taken off as people expected it to, it features groups with large reach that often fail to get the traffic you wish, and yet it's run by one of the biggest technology companies of all time. I guess that's the only reason people still try to use it.
However, conceptually speaking, it's not all that bad. You have universal accounts you can use to get interesting feed from groups, it's basically like having an RSS feed tied to your Google account... or is it?

Is there really any feature Google+ has that other social media platforms lack, or is the Google in Google+ the only reason why people are still pushing it?

Google+ has just been busy for a few month, and technology enthusiasts. Features that Google only will a lot better compared to other societal support systems . Facebook and Twitter do offer means to talk about with you upgrades but they are much less fine tuned. Both Facebook and Twitter do not allow it to be simpler to locate and talk about articles.