Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Google Linux

Google Trying to Lure Celebs to Google+ 198

alphadogg writes "Part of the buzz this week about Google+ is that Google is reportedly working to lure celebrities such as Lady Gaga to its new social network service with verified accounts. Not sure if tech big shots beyond Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg count as celebrities, but the list of the technology industry's biggest names using Google+ is on the rise. Dell chief Michael Dell – yes, the real Michael Dell — has grabbed headlines for his early enthusiasm for Google+ and interest in using it as a newfangled customer support and interaction tool. Open source movers and shakers like Linus Torvalds, Miguel de Icaza are also posting away."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Google Trying to Lure Celebs to Google+

Comments Filter:
  • by grantek ( 979387 ) on Wednesday July 20, 2011 @07:02PM (#36829588)

    If they can get Mark Shuttleworth on board, they'll have Google+ replacing Thunderbird in Ubuntu by the next release...

    • by blair1q ( 305137 ) on Wednesday July 20, 2011 @07:09PM (#36829654) Journal

      Isn't he going to replace the Linux Kernel in Ubuntu with Skype, too?

  • by Hsien-Ko ( 1090623 ) on Wednesday July 20, 2011 @07:03PM (#36829602)
    Bill Gates will use it and be friends with Linus. Can't wait to see his profile...
  • William Shatner []... Then you are not welcome.
  • by Xaositecte ( 897197 ) on Wednesday July 20, 2011 @07:05PM (#36829622) Journal

    It worked for Scientology after all.

    Does this mean Google is finally evil, though?

    • by zget ( 2395308 )
      They have always known what works marketing wise. Just that this time it's more about luring in normal people and teens instead of geeks.
    • by halivar ( 535827 )

      It means Facebook's has got thetans all up in their business.

    • by smash ( 1351 )
      What do you mean, finally? They are a multi-billion dollar corporation, they're not a charity.
      • Mostly just poking fun at Google's slogan there :P

        I'd expect any corporation to be "Not good" - shady, unethical, etc. Otherwise they'd probably go out of business, But outright evil is a whole different league.

  • Open the damn thing up to us normal people who so far haven't been able to get an invite.

  • Why?

    I'm already there!

  • by tloh ( 451585 ) on Wednesday July 20, 2011 @07:19PM (#36829758)


    The simplest way to push Google+ is to leverage the noise-making power of fan-boys the world over. Imagine the volumes of traffic and the recruitment potential for Google+ if they can attract enthusiastic fanatics to fight classic holy wars such as:

    VI vs EMACS
    Harvard vs Yale
    Liverpool vs Manchester United
    Edward vs Jacob
    Barbie vs. G.I. Joe

    With the trolls so distracted, maybe they'll leave slashdot in peace for the rest of us, at least for a while.

  • ...maybe if they stick a small amount of notoriety under a box propped up with a stick, tie string to it and wait around the corner?

    Oh no wait, that'll just get Youtube celebrities.

  • Geek celebrities (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Ruke ( 857276 ) on Wednesday July 20, 2011 @07:27PM (#36829850)
    Both Wil Wheaton and Felicia Day are pretty active users of Google+. I know that these people aren't going to draw in your everyday user, but I'm sure entertained by Wesley Crusher posting videos of cats on the internet.
    • Add Sean Bonner. He's worth the price of admission alone.
  • I predict that as soon as Google+ is opened to the public, Facebook will implode like a wet paper bag. Heck, with the rate people have been sneaking in by asking everyone they know for invites, it might happen even before the official launch.

    • by eh2o ( 471262 )

      Somebody should let Rupert Murdoch know, he likes to buy imploding social networks.

  • by NicknamesAreStupid ( 1040118 ) on Wednesday July 20, 2011 @07:38PM (#36829940)
    Strong typed and object oriented, only bots and web crawlers can join, but there are BILLIONS of them. You know, the Internet of Things, so farsighted of them.
  • Yeah, like this [].

  • If Lady Gag-me-with-a-stick-a gets to use a pseudonym, what about the rest of us? Or are there different rules for the peasantry?
    I know...I shouldn't ask rhetorical questions...

    • If Lady Gag-me-with-a-stick-a gets to use a pseudonym, what about the rest of us?

      If Ms. Germanotta can file a DBA [], you can too.

      • Is Google+ for doing business? Facebook and Myspace had options specifically for artists. G+ doesn't...yet.

      • I've seen the name credited as p/k/a ("professionally known as")
        DBAs are more for smaller-scale business ventures (whatever the industry); there's a web of LLC's and regular corp's here.

        • DBA just means "doing business as", and the requirements vary. Or the lack thereof -- sometimes it's merely a de facto thing rather than needing registration in some states.

          I do wonder if I could use JabberWokky -- I'm registered to vote and get regular mail under the name (it's a real world nickname from theater... even my wife calls me it). I do some non-profit work under the name, and have performed on stage with the name.

    • Who would want to sell records under the name Stefani Germanotta? "Oh, I love that song! Who sings it?" "Stefani Germa--something with a G, I think?"
      • by JanneM ( 7445 )

        Yes, just look what a complete failure that actor was with that weird foreign, long, impossible to even spell name; what was it - "Arnold Schwarzenegger" or some completely, utterly hopeless name like that. No way it could have worked.

        • Good point, though his name worked for his image instead of against it: he was the tough German (Austrian really, but close enough) who starred in action movies and did some bodybuilding. Germanotta doesn't seem to work for an American pop star. I can't think of other examples of singers/movie stars with particularly foreign names, though I admit I haven't tried very hard. I briefly looked through the Wikipedia American pop singers [] category. Of the names I recognized, Christina Aguilera had the "strangest",
          • The name changing seems more prevalent with actors and actresses; a lot of pop stars seem to use their birth name as-is, or use part of their birth name as a mononym. Ahnold is mentioned above as an exception to the actor naming pattern, Katy Perry (born Katheryn Hudson) is another exception to the popstar naming pattern.

            • It can be a requirement for professional actors. Michael Keaton was born Michael Douglas, but SAG wouldn't let him use his birth name. There are lots of other examples; in an industry where your name recognition is critical and credits are key, your registered name with the 4As often varies from your birth name.

              • yeah, I've heard that before - if an actor has the same name as another actor, SAG makes said person change their business name even if not their real name.
                (back to my example, Katy Perry chose to take that stage name so as to avoid confusion with the actress Kate Hudson)

    • If Lady Gag-me-with-a-stick-a gets to use a pseudonym, what about the rest of us? Or are there different rules for the peasantry? I know...I shouldn't ask rhetorical questions...

      Dude. Just don't list your real name. If I learned anything from Facebook, it's to never use your real name. I'm now under a nickname that everybody who has known me since college will recognize (and probably know to search for). If I really need my actual name out there, I'll create another account and make sure that it looks good

    • You put in the name you commonly go by. If you ask people who Lady Gaga is, they're a damn sight more likely to know that name rather than the one on her birth certificate.

  • Another vector they might want to approach is to make profiles available to those of us with Apps domains. You know. So we can USE google+.

    Just throwing that out there.

    • Amen, grasshoppa!

      Seriously -- I am not only paying for it, but I've set dozens of clients up with it, both free and paid. This is not a good situation. Luckily for us, they pretty much have to support it by the time schools let in for the fall. Otherwise, they just borked themselves.

  • I know mainstream celebrities tend not to be popular around here (mentioning Gaga in the summary was asking for trouble IMHO), but if you want to use the social network in question for other things, does it really get in your way?
    It might even be a good thing even if you don't care about it, the crowd helping sustain the social network's business model [with a small marginal cost for less-popular uses]

  • Can somebody send me an invite please? My e-mail address is:

    mark.zuckerberg AT

    I want to know what all the fuzz is about.

They are called computers simply because computation is the only significant job that has so far been given to them.