Michael, thanks for sharing your perspective so articulately. This is exactly why I brought you into the conversation. You’re incredibly bright, extremely conversant in social media and (horror of horrors) under 18! 

Thanks again for asking Irene! And thanks for the kind words.

+1

Good article. I agree. This article reminded me of a campaign battle between Coke and Pepsi….When Pepsi was making headway on Coke in the younger target market (probably due to the sweeter/sugary taste that pepsi offers) coke gave up – it changed its strategy and did the opposite. Coke came up with a killer campaign that basically said “All right kids, we’re not going to push you, when you’re ready for the real thing, we’ve got it for you”. Suddenly, all the kids who wanted to grow up fast and look cool were seen drinking Coke. So I see the similarity in G+ trying to compete in a new market space (blue ocean?) and I would say it’s definitely a smart differentiating move. 

Such a good comparison! I completely agree. I’m not sure if I want to call it yet and say that G+ will win like Coke did, but a lot seems to be pointing to that…

This is actually a brilliant perspective and a great view on it. You, sir, are awesome.

(for the record, no matter how clever keeping it at 18 may be Google has plans to lower it to 13 when it becomes open rather than invite-only)

Good reflection, Michael, as usual I want to say ;). I figured you could be interested in an article I just read about a similar topic
http://www.digitaltrends.com/social-media/google-minus-women-kids-and-businesses/ 
From what I’ve been reading elsewhere, it does appear they intend to keep G+ kid-free…While they will not get that many users, it may indeed be relieving to a lot of people from the more mature audience. 
As to why Google did that, I think appealing to the more mature audience is not the only reason: it may also want to simply avoid the hassle linked to having underaged people see content they shouldn’t (related to sex or other).

Yeah, I know they plan to do that, but by then the network effects and perception of the network will already have been built. Facebook opened up solely to Harvard students. Then expanded. This is the same. G+ opens up to 18+ only. Then expands.

The success of social networks depends on the public perception of them. And G+ is building a great perception from the start by doing 18+. So even if they open up to 13+ later on, the positive perception of the network will already have been built.

Well….. we all enjoyed you on G+, guess you’ll have to wait until you hit the appropriate age…. I’ll be sure to send you screenshots when they add new features……

Thanks for that Andy :)

[...] who has created it, it has a mindset and perception targeted to the technology industry. Also, as I wrote about the other day, the 18+ age limit has contributed to this perception people get of [...]

I made a video about this http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QoUBRN0Yiao

I have to disagree with you, I believe that it is not a smart move at all. Google plus was not made to be a higher class version of Facebook. Their goal is to compete with Facebook, and it would be nearly impossible to achieve that goal without minors on the site, as of 2010, approximately 18% of Facebook users are under 18, and when you take into account that a significant amount of people who actually are under 18 have lied about their age in order to access Facebook either before they turned 13, let’s say approximately 1%, that puts us at 19% of Facebook users under 18. with approximately 750 million users on Facebook that is a total of approximately 142.5 million users who cannot use Google plus. Google plus currently has approximately 25 million users. this means that currently there are approximately 5.7 times the number of under age Facebook users as there are Google plus users. In addition many people do not know about Google plus. Google representatives have stated that they only have the 18+ age restriction because they are working on extra privacy features for minors. 

The only reason that you think this is a smart move is because you aren’t under 18.

Eh… I am under 18. I’m 16, as I said.

Because people can’t be mature unless they’re over eighteen. Oh, that, and anybody over eighteen is automatically considered mature by society?

Google seriously needs to realize that they are alienating their consumer base.  People aren’t going to turn eighteen and suddenly decide it’s time to switch over from Facebook to Google+.  In fact, Google is just giving Facebook plenty of time to catch up.  

Your much stupider than you pretend in this article. The reason you were allowed in is probably because you entered the wrong date of birth when you first made a Google Account and this is what  Google+ uses. Your argument that an age limit will benefit the service makes sense to begin with but why not make it open to everyone once all the important people are already on board! Then they can improve the network with more content for young people while the professional content for elders is preserved! Anyway, above all, you prove that your whole argument is wrong by arguing Facebook was restricted by the fact that it target young users rather than old ones! Facebook is the largest social network ever and it grew incredibly fast. Old people usually don’t have the time for social networks and as such don’t use them, but Google+ shows them a quicker better way to network and it will also be able to target young users frustrated with Facebook if only it removed the age block (although I am biased as a person under 18, at 16, I have been blocked from accessing Google+ and even though I have an invite, my account is closed :( )

Google will definitely open it up to everyone, including under 18s, later in the future of the product. They are being smart to begin with and taking their time to build out better protection for people under 18, since the account synchronizes with public google search results.

I was stating some of the other benefits to google from this decision, whether those reasons were part of their decision making or not.

I don’t even want to use the “social networking” part of G+… All I want is the new Angry Birds that is exclusively G+!

Okay buddy listen here there are many mature people under 18 and I think it’s very wrong of you to stereotype all kids/teenagers to be unintelligent justin bieber-lovers. I didn’t know google+ was only available to the highly-intelligent prestigious businessmen and politicians like yourself. HAHA! you wish! think of how many people it could appeal to seeing how as pretty much everyone from 10-18 uses social networks regularily. 

If you think I was saying that then you obviously missed the point of the article. Of course there are many mature people under 18, and of course Google+ will be opened up to everyone of all ages eventually. This article was explaining why I personally believe it was a smart move by Google to INITIALLY open it up to over 18 only. I fully expected to be banned from G+ for writing this article, but I guess their systems aren’t good enough at tracking everyone yet.

In regard to your other abusive comment which I’ve deleted – you may want to show some maturity since you’re posting comments like this. Thanks.

I agree with what you’re saying. But every successful social network in history has opened up initially by restricting who can use it. Facebook started by limiting it to solely elite Harvard students. G+ is doing the same thing, just with age (for better or for worse).

Google will shortly open it up to everyone including people under 18. And because they’ve got some seriously passionate users over 18, people under 18 will pay attention the moment they can use it.

[...] | Tags: 18 years, age restriction, G+, Google, Google Plus | No Comments » Tweet My post a month ago on why I believe the Google+ 18-and-over age restriction is a smart move was met with [...]

Ok. So what you are saying is, it’s either a social network for grown-ups or teens. You think it’s better that it targets the 18+ age group yet you want to be part of it. I think that once Google+ launches with and age restriction, it’s only going to receive attention for about a week, then everyone would have forgotten about it. Google+ has so much potential to beat other social networks, but it will not receive as much publicity as they would have liked. For Google to make such a great network and then put an age restriction, is like putting a I-phone 5 in front of you, and telling you you can’t have it.

No, that’s not what I’m saying at all. I’m saying that Google+ is for all audiences, but in the end they will have more success by opening it up to individual audiences first.

If you had an iPhone 5 put in front of you, and got told you couldn’t have it, you’d still want it when you were eventually told you could have it, right? :)

You don’t have “mature” and “immature.” There are many different levels of maturity. As much as I would like to think that I rank high up, it’s only natural that I as a 17 year old am not as mature as a 30 year old, although more mature than an average 13 year old. I plan on getting on as soon as they open it up, although I was bummed that I couldn’t get on when I got an invite (As I was when I did not receive a CR-48).

I see what you are saying, though. Even if Google didn’t do it to keep “immature” people off, that has happened and the result is higher-ups feeling more comfortable with using it. But I don’t think it has enough hype among the younger groups. When it opens to then, they might think “Didn’t that come out a long time ago? Must be pretty dumb.” or something like that. Google wants as many people on here as possible to see ads.

If we really are mature, lets act like it rather than telling everyone how mature we are. You know who you are…

 -Nathanael

This is in fact very TEMPORARY! Google plus, for legal reasons, is keeping the age limit at 18 until all security implementations are in place, and thoroughly tested.

If it was permanent, THAT would be stupid of Google. If you have any idea when it may be opened up to people under 18, do let us know :)

I don’t think it’s a move for the whole fact of being “mature”,
I personally think it’s more of a marketing technique, and a strong one at that. If Google was to open it for everyone then after a while the craze would go down, especially since there are a lot more kid’s that adults using the internet. But as soon as they open the gates for teens the user base will shoot up again.

I’m 17 as I post this and frustrated about this situation, but then again, my life isn’t in front of my computer :)

I too agree with this article and I am bummed that I can not join because I am 16. I completely understand that under 18s would bring a lot of immaturity to G+, especially if it is a more sophisticated social network. I myself would love to join so I wouldn’t have to deal with people that talk like this, “lyk tha otha dy.” Not only that but I use a lot of the Google products for social and educational purposes.

I’m a 17 year old as well, living in the US, and I’m been trying to get on Google+ for a while and especially in the past two days.  I read this post, and completely changed my mind.  You are 100% correct, and I believe that Google should keep the age limit.  I will definitely just wait the 5 months.  However, I have one question.  What about all my 20-something-30-something teachers at school?  They’re all young, hip, in the social scene, they have their large groups of coworker friends, and they’re always interacting with each other on Facebook.  So on one hand, they’re real people too, went to college, still young, a few married, they can easily interact with former students once graduated and in college, and beyond.  On the other hand, they are the top as society as you put in – they are educators in a great school district in one of the wealthiest counties in the country.  Okay, maybe I made that up, but all I’m saying is that that kind of group is caught in the middle.  What your opinion as the author of this post? Do you think they’re the target market for G+, or do you think it comes a little later on, once more life experiences are underway?

I really can’t speak much to that specific demographic as I don’t know enough about what it’s like to be them. But I’d say they would find value in Google+ as a professional network, but maybe less so with friends. For that group, I’d suggest Facebook is probably still more targeted and what they’d still be more likely to use.

I agree with most of what you said, but I think they could keep a lot more people happier and more intent on joining once the restrictions are lifted if they would give some estimation on when those restrictions are going to be lifted.  Especially with Facebook’s timeline coming out tomorrow. As you said, Facebook is geared more towards teens, and Google losing those people in the long run because of Facebook’s improvements, (that everyone enjoys complaining about,) would probably hurt.  Personally I think Google+ is worth the wait since I really like Google’s products, but I still can’t help being annoyed that I can’t get in now, as I’m only 16.  Also, how much do you think this really has to do with maturity?  I think it’s more the security issues, but how long can it really take to put those in place?  Whatever the case, making it an exclusive group could definitely appeal to younger people, but not necessarily the immature ones.  To me that makes sense, but I don’t know how true it will turn out to be.  It could deter young people for the most part because it won’t seem fun(Hangouts looks so fun. I’m pumped.), or make it cool because they weren’t allowed to join before.  What do you think?

I think this is somewhat unsmart of Google, some “under 18″ are as mature as some “over 18″ people, as a guy said below, isn’t by turning 18 that you autoamtically turn into a mature person.
Not all teenagers are obsessed fans of celebrities (or whatever they think we are), some prefer being useful and write and participate on interesting topics..
Not only that, we are the future of society, keeping everyone off it is an nice invitation to other social networks, like Twitter and Facebook…Imo, Google could lower this limitation to 15+ or 14+ or do some sort of validation (like it’s currently happening with G+ name policy, where some names require to be manually validated)…

On one hand I agree with you, but on another I think they’re at risk alienating a rather large chunk of their users because of it. I’m 17, and am pretty frustrated at having these restrictions. I’m at a point where I would rather have the opportunity make mistakes rather than be protected from them and told it’s for my own good.

Maybe 16 or 17+ would be a good comprimise, as I noticed that at this point alot of my friends started to either quit, or resort to mobile facebook to avoid the gimmicks, and it’s an age where people seem to finally start getting serious, (at least in the UK where at this age we tend to be seperated from younger people education-wise) while leaving enough time to build up a friend base, because how many people would switch from facebook to google+ just before college and lose the majority of your friends (I imagine it’s also like banks, they try and get you while your students becuase it’s more likely you’ll stick with them) I’d also imagine it’d be a nice novelty for the older kids, and bring more of them in to be allowed somewhere considered “adult”.

Now having said all that, I imagine in a few months when I hit 18, I’ll be all for it, and I bet it’s also the time they lower the age to 13 :D

Yeah, I agree with you about 16 being a good compromise! 

And I fully expect Google to remove the restriction before you turn 18 :) Fingers crossed, anyway…

Of course not all teens under 18 are immature – would be silly for anyone to ever think that. But like most things in life, Google had to make a generalization.

Someone else also commented, suggesting that age 16 would be a good compromise. I agree, but at the same time, everyone under 16 (or 14, whatever age it’s lowered to) would then complain too. So whatever they do, Google will be temporarily alienating a chunk of its users. There’s no way around that, unless it goes Facebook’s route and doesn’t require validation… Which leads to a slew of other problems.

its new age limit must be 13+

Well, atleast with age 16 it would be 2 years less to people wait until being able to join the network (instead of 18). Also, who can say the underagers won’t create fake accounts to get around this limitation?

You talk about Google’s ‘targeting of the most influential people in all of society’, and yet, the entire article is about how they HAVEN’T opened it up to ALL society yet.I, too, am under 18, but have a Google account that is over that age (mainly for watching certain YouTube videos). I’ve used G+ with this account, but because of the nature of a social network, I’ve decided not to get to involved in it until I can use my full account.

From my point of view, this is a horrible decision on the part of Google. If under 18s can’t use it, then they’ll stick with Facebook. Even when they turn 18, they won’t just immediately up and leave, because at least some of their friends will be still under-age. Besides, they’ll have invested all their time and effort (let’s say they’re honest) since the age of 13 on Facebook, and won’t want to then have to start over from scratch.

There is one very big difference in the comparison though. “Coke came up with a killer campaign that basically said “All right kids, we’re not going to push you, when you’re ready for the real thing, we’ve got it for you”. Suddenly, all the kids who wanted to grow up fast and look cool were seen drinking Coke.” You said it yourself, the KIDS were seen drinking Coke. So Coke didn’t put an age limit on it’s products, they just used a different strategy of marketing. G+ isn’t doing that. They’ve put a restriction, and unless they sort out their privacy features soon, they could possibly lose a huge part of the teenage market. I am 17, yet in university, and G+ would facilitate my education. Yet I have no choice but to use Facebook, since it is all that is available. So, as I get accustomed to Facebook, i will be less inclined to waste my time with G+ once it becomes available to teens, as i am already used to Facebook.

I definitely agree. Those who say Google is alienating its fan base can only be true to a very small extent, as evidenced by their continued interest in the matter. From a teenage point-of-view (which I do have, being underage myself), Google is making their product exclusive, scarce. So, yes, I do think that when people reach the age limit they’ll sign up for it, despite their previous blocking. Because you can’t drive till a certain age, does that mean you feel so outraged you take the bus forever?

The worst thing is when they email me saying I can join, yet they know full well I’m under 18.

[...] by allowing the 13-17 demographic will allow Google+ to create a strong business presence. Many tech savvy teenagers also welcome this decision of Google+. Initially they were all a little worried with the age restriction imposed on the site. [...]

Hmmm, interesting

Google had 2 choises, if they chose to allow 11 year old justin bieber fans, it would grow faster but less adults would use it
They chose the second way, only allowing adults to use it, having them settled before all justin bieber fans goes all over the place ^^

The only question is if it really was the right choise to restrict it, i don’t know anyone having G+ exept for me and 2 of my friends irl (i live in sweden) and that’s sad. We will never know if they did the right choise or not

It’s good that they chose the sprcific age of 18 at least, if it would be 15 or 16, all those 13 year olds who have a mentor(a brother or sister etc.) would think “OMG, he/she’s using it. I have to use G+ too! Let’s make a new google account with a fake age of 25!”

It’s all very well people assuming that having the age limit is the main reason that Google+ has such high quality content, but has anyone looked at their ‘What’s Hot’ stream lately? It’s all Gifs and cat videos, exactly the sort of thing you’ve said has been avoided by keeping kids off. I think that rather than not having under-18s, Google+ has benefited from the early adopter community’s enthusiasm to keep the content high quality. As it becomes more mainstream it is inevitable that the quality of the content will degrade. The general perception that teens have no idea what they are doing online is also flawed, I’m willing to bet I’m not the only one responsible for keeping my entire house’s network going… 

I think I that people under the age limit should shave to be invited, in order to keep some unwanted pests off of the website. I’m fourteen, and honestly there are still people in my age group that are the reason google is hesitant to let us on.

The age limit should be 16.

Who ever said that people over 18 are mature? Most of the time they are not because they are open too many immature things for i.e (partying, sex, etc) Teenagers do not pollute social networks in a wrong way they are simply are finding a way to connect with other’s. 

Another thing that makes me mad is that youtube is open to 13 year olds and up when semi-porn is a possible find. I don’t think you’ll find porn on google plus.. You think? In ways I think youtube is way more dangerous than google plus would ever be so why are they screwing us with G+?

They are also cutting out a huge group of people! They will never defeat Facebook if they are an 18 and up social networking site. Facebook has been around and has accumulated many users. If google plus wants to catch up they need to lower the age limit so they can at least get more users.

I also think that its stupid because they know many kids will create fake id’s to get in.. But kids that want to stay genuine and real are left with no choice but to wait. Its simply not hard to put some settings up for hiding info and making a social network safe so I don’t know why its taking forever to get it up and running for teens.

Google+ would’ve been better off letting 13 and up use it… 

I’m sorry to see that Google+ is restricting users because of age, seeing that I myself am a minor, but I realize that a “teen atmosphere” turns off many adults on social websites.

Then again, I have many friends who have simply lied about their age to get into Google+. If Google is going to restrict minors, maybe they should fish out those who lied? I refuse lie to get into a social network, but it seems that Google+ might be more of a business and “mature” environment. There are many teens who are mature, and many adults who are not as mature as those teens, but age still is requirement.

My only hope is that the age requirement is part of beta testing.

Thanks, very useful. Peace

Hello, I don’t quite agree with ”
 it will turn G+ into a more “mature” environment” . Under 18s are more mature than some of the adults out there.  I would say chainging it to 15 + would be a better choice as this would stop ‘adults’ from writing things like rude comments and posting images that are not of people with a ‘sound mind’

I am kind of riding the fence in position here. Why not just implement an intelligent age-filtering interface design (e.g. multiple Google Plus Base Numbers?)

seriously ? i don’t see anything smart in starting the product with restricting it to above 18 
and then allow it to below 18
whats smart in that ?
if it is because they want to build a better protection 
then why they didn’t before they launch 
so that everybody can use it the moment it is out

     I’m a 14 y/o guy, and I agree with Micheal. Teens tend to clog up social networking with drama and their life’s story and repel adults away from open networks like Facebook. I also understand the point of view of the other teens who posted. I often think I’m way more mature than adults give me credit for, but in reality, that’s just hormones telling me I’m grown up. Because your ‘real world’ life starts at 18, it would be appropriate to join the more mature setting in Google+ where you can be free from the ranting of a teen’s opinion and extensive trolling. Unfortunately, social networking will always have faults and immaturity is inevitable where ever you go in some way, sorry Google, I guess it comes with the territory.
          The fact that a country’s ruler has joined it legitimately is
impressive and probably short lived, what’s the point of a ruler having a
Google Plus account? (if the author has an explanation, please share, thanks) Facebook currently provides an exceptional network for everyone, why must a teen be a part of every last Social Network? All it takes is one network for a teen to spill his or her guts all over the door mat to the entire world. So if your unhappy with Google+’s age limit, stop venting about and get back to whatever network you’re already wasting your time with, because venting doesn’t help, it just makes you look a little nuts.
       The age limit disappointed me as well but reading this blog post definitely explains the perks for Google+’s adult only users. I don’t have a Facebook, but I’m getting one. Even so, I still question why I want one: “I’ve lived 14 years without one, why do I have to have one now?” So I’m sure I can live with out Google Plus just as long. Signing off, (and soon to be wasting my time on FB) Jacob Rodgers; Leading Expert on himself.

Very well said :)

Do you have a blog or something that I read more of your thoughts on?

In regard to a ruler having a Google Plus (or any social network) account: it’s probably something to do with both getting the public on your side and showing that you’re not so above the public that you won’t even use a social networking account. If you look at how many people interact with Obama, or NZ’s Prime Minister John Key, on their social network accounts, you’ll see that there is some value in it. The leaders can see for themselves what the public wants – and the public feels as though they have a direct link to the leader.

I do have a blog for Doctor Who fans, but I rarely post on it except for the occasional episode review and Doctor Who news. I wouldn’t say it’s all that great, but I only post for the fun of it. http://www.awhoblog,blogspot.com
–Okay, thanks for the explanation.  :) Like the site btw.

Age limitation is an example of age discrimination and ageism, in which segregates youth minds from the world. It is quite similar to racial segregation before it became unlawful. I consider ageism unethical, in conjunction with the stereotyping of youths. It is, and was proven, to be a substantial cause of youth depression. Conspicuously among younger teenagers being the time when they first realize they are being discriminated against.

There is an easy way for people under 18 to join Google +, even if you wrote your age as under 18 without making a new account. You need a mobile device with internet access for the task. Log in to your Gmail from your mobile device and then click the +You button on the top left. My son tried it and it somehow worked. He was so excited. I know it works with iDevices, but I’m not sure about other mobile devices. I think it should work because they both have the same mobile website.