Google doesn’t seem to get how media works now
Google launched a news-reading app called Currents on Thursday, something it has been working on for some time — ever since it was a much-rumored skunkworks project called Propeller — and much of the coverage of the new app has called it a challenger to existing tablet and iPhone news-readers like Flipboard and Zite. But while Google Currents is superficially similar to these other services, there are some important differences that make me wonder whether Google really understands how media has changed and is changing. For a company that’s usually so forward-thinking, Currents as it stands now is more than a little disappointing.
Like Flipboard and Zite, the new Google offering (available here — U.S. only at this point) allows you to pull in content from a number of sources and then read through it in a kind of digital-magazine format on a tablet or an iPhone or other mobile device (my colleague Darrell has a hands-on look at the app). As mobile media consumption becomes an ever-increasing part of our lives, this kind of app is becoming the way that many people take in a lot of their news — at least those who wish to browse rather than simply following their favorite news sources on Twitter or Facebook. And Flipboard has shown, particularly with its excellent new iPhone app, that this can be done in a way that’s just as visually appealing as a traditional magazine, if not more so.
Currents is missing some crucial elements
Google’s app, while well-designed in many ways, lacks much of the polish and user-interface elements that make Flipboard so compelling (to me at least). And at least in my limited usage of it so far, it doesn’t even manage to rise to the level that Zite provides — and Zite, a Canadian startup that was acquired by CNN earlier this year for an estimated $20 million, is much more utilitarian in its approach than Flipboard (Zite also just released an iPhone app). It’s entirely possible Google’s app will improve over time, and it does offer some interesting features — such as the ability to sync the content you’ve read between devices — but I still think it’s missing some crucial aspects.
For example, Google Currents is social in at least one way, in that it lets you share articles you read to Twitter and Facebook, provided you click through the default menu (which promotes sharing on Google’s own Google+ network first). But it isn’t social in another important sense: Unlike both Flipboard and Zite, it doesn’t pull in your Twitter lists or streams from those you follow, or content from your Facebook social graph. In other words, you can push content out to these networks, but you can’t pull content in from them and view it inside your news reader. To me, that means Currents is only one-half of a proper social-news app — and not even the most interesting half.
Why isn’t Google helping us filter content?
The second element Google Currents seems to be missing is recommendations or some form of smart filtering of content, apart from the limited amount that appears in the “trending” section. This is something Zite has pursued aggressively, both via its algorithms and through explicit recommendations from users — thumbs up, thumbs down, etc. — and is likely one of the reasons why CNN was interested in acquiring it. Flipboard hasn’t done much in terms of recommendations so far, but has begun to do so through its iPhone app “Cover Stories” feature, which apparently learns based on a user’s activity.
As we’ve noted many times, the massive rivers of information that pour into our lives from all kinds of sources makes the need for a smart filter more compelling every day. That seems like a problem virtually tailor-made for a company like Google, which has boatloads of programmers who specialize in filtering and understanding massive amounts of real-time data, yet the company has done virtually nothing in that space — despite having a long-established platform called Google News to draw from and build on. The only thing Google has done that seems remotely interesting is adding +1 recommendations to Google News, but even that seems designed mostly to promote the Google+ network.
An app like Currents should — particularly if it wants to actually be competitive with Flipboard or Zite — be pulling in news content from every source available, especially real-time sharing networks like Twitter and Facebook. Then it should apply smart filters and recommendations to those streams, to help news consumers sort and understand that information better. Instead, Currents feels about as innovative as your garden-variety app from a traditional magazine — in other words, not very innovative at all. More than anything, it feels like a giant missed opportunity.
Post and thumbnail photos courtesy of Flickr users Izzard
Related research and analysis from GigaOM Pro:
Subscriber content. Sign up for a free trial.
You can pull content from any feed I believe as well as Google Reader which is integrated at the source level. The light curation seems to be in the form of recommended sources … again, light.
The share out is a bit broken. I posted what I thought was going to be annotated comment to Facebook and instead what was shared was my comment and that I used Currents to post, not the actual article. Also +1 is limited as well. You can only +1 something, but you can’t push it to a Circle which is pretty silly.
Thanks, Jonathan — it does seem odd that you can’t share it to a Google+ Circle. Perhaps that will be added later.
While it’s just okay, it’s the only thing close to Flipboard on Android. So a small win at least.
Google Reader is much more useful.
All of the above and then some.
Google seems to be stuck in the early days of computing which where all about data isolation[1], from having Gigaom under business not under tech. Why not both and have the selection influence the articles I see. Neurology/Psychology had the same problem for a long time, but know we know a little more[2]. None of which is reflected in Googel’s new products from + to currents. Don’t get me started on the separation of add add remove, or why can’t I just get business news or tech news from Gigaom. From an information data design rather …. BTW, Jeff pointed me to his paper in his infinite patience after I went on a rant on how badly designed, data isolation and integration, currents is.
1. http://jeffjonas.typepad.com/jeff_jonas/2010/11/general-purpose-sensemaking-systems-and-information-colocation.html
2. http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/news/releases/even-unconsciously-sound-helps-us-see.html
Thanks for the those links, Ronald — and for the comment as well.
I’m happy with this article. It’s the first time that someone really looked well to Currents. The only thing that’s not completely right in my opinion, is the non-integration of facebook/twitter. It’s something that I don’t call news and interesting enough to be part of Currents. Google is afraid of being innovative, look what happened with Wave! Very good but they haven’t improved a single thing all these years!
Currents is really interesting, but true to Google form, it isn’t well integrated with other Google applications. Notably, how exactly does it fit with Reader? It doesn’t automatically pull in Reader feeds. When I read an article in Currents, it doesn’t show as read in Reader (and vice versa). How is it that two things so clearly similar to each other seem to be in two totally different silos?
So basically you want Currents to be Flipboard.
What’s the point of that?
I tried Flipboard and quickly nuked it. I like that Currents is more streamlined and it felt ‘cleaner’ to me. You can keep Flipboard…please don’t pressure Google into just cloning another app.
I suppose you don’t like Google+ because it isn’t Facebook, right?
I’m sure that there’s this sense that if they were to have similarities, a lawyer would be on Google’s doorstep claiming they stole Flipboard’s idea. So they have to try to do the same thing but not do the same thing.
Perhaps now that Flipboard has put out a phone app, they’ll consider porting it to Android which would be the first step toward making it also available on Android tablets. Then, we, the consumers, could choose if we prefer the Currents approach or the Flipboard approach. Until then, those of us using Android devices don’t have the opportunity to use Flipboard, if we so desire.
Great article.
the funny thing is that people like my wife just don’t get Flipboard, but might see Currents as useful.
I have 2 primary uses for Flipboard:
1. As a Twitter list reader – I have a half-dozen or so curated twitter lists that I read through Flipboard – and it’s a great way to let me see what’s current, especially for people who are not part of my regular stream.
(I also use this to read Jason’s Media ReDEF, which has similar properties)
2. As a “read later” device – I favorite tweets that I want to read later, and then read them in Flipboard. It’s amazingly simple and elegant for this purpose.
My wife doesn’t use Twitter, doesn’t know RSS, etc. But if you give her an easy way to read a handful of magazines, that could be a win. So, Currents is not very useful for early adopters, but could be a good tablet magazine view for mainstream readers. And, to that extent, could be more of a threat to traditional magazines than Flipboard, depending upon eventual syndication strategies for tablets.
Google releases and iterates. Gmail wasn’t Outlook when launched but look at it now, serving both early adopters and the mainstream. I am sure that this is the path they will take with Currents.