The battle of the social networks is raging and as the new guy in town Google + is getting all the attention. With a startlingly high rate of early adoption - almost 20 million users barely a month into operation, as recently reported - Google + is definitely the social network of the moment.

Social networking has become an indispensable weapon in the journalist's arsenal. It is a tool ideally suited to the rapid gathering and sharing of information, in addition to engaging not only with colleagues but with the public as well.

As Google steals the spotlight, however, questions are being asked about what will happen to its competitors.

Obviously, Facebook and Twitter are not going to disappear overnight. Both have huge followings, Facebook has 750 million active users, according to its statistics page and twitter passed the 200 million user mark this spring. Yet it is undeniable that these companies will feel compelled to respond to the growing popularity of Google +.

And how are they responding? In a word: 'feature-creep'. Feature-creep, as described by Gigaom.com, is a term coined by technology journalists to describe the cumulative addition of features to online services. Facebook and its recent partnership with Skype is one example of this; in order to compete like-for-like with the Google+ and its 'hangout' feature, Facebook bolted on the additional ability to video call and the ability to incorporate users' Facebook newsfeed into Skype.

However, not even this could stop the rise of Google+. Despite the fact that Facebook does share many features in common with Google+, for instance, not every one of your friends has to see everything you do on Facebook, but the idea of 'circles' in Google + has been far better advertised than the equivalent 'list' feature in Facebook and seems much more manageable to many users.

It is this kind of separation that allows Google+ to serve all your networking needs, both social and professional, and with the addition of corporate profiles, the idea of Google+ as a networking space for all people and purposes will be reinforced. Launching Facebook news pages is just one more means of attempting to kill any chance of Google+ monopolising certain features.

It really does seem that Facebook and Google have a war on their hands.

But what of that other social network that is currently such a lynch-pin of the corporate world: Twitter?

Recently there has been much criticism of Twitter from noted journalists, on the grounds that it lacks the diversity of features that makes Google+ so popular. Robert Scoble described the site as 'boring' and Farhad Manjoo, of Slate magazine, mooted the idea that the 140 character limit be dropped.

However, Mathew Ingram of Gigaom.com, defends the purpose of Twitters brief 140 character post, stating that they are the ideal vehicles for concise nuggets of information. It's Twitter's ability to act as a kind of information bullet - powerful, effective and instantaneous - that has made it such a vital tool in affecting social change and helping ordinary people create the news.

Hence, Twitter doesn't need to adopt that 'feature-creep' effect. Twitter may develop over time, but the service at present, while very different from the stellar social network of the moment Google+, offers something which is a unique tool for journalists.

It is tempting to think that it's necessary to back social media like a horse at a derby, to pick one or two and run with it. Actually, when it comes to considering social networks and how best to use them to communicate with colleagues or an audience, thinking about the strengths and weaknesses of each is the first step to making the most of their journalistic
potential.

Source: Editor's Weblog, Facebook (1) , (2) , Gigaom.com, Mashable.com, Readwriteweb.com,