Social networks have changed the world of news; in fact, it's hard to imagine journalism without them.

No one could have missed the reaction to Google + arriving on the scene and all the speculation about whether the giant that is Google would change our social media landscape.

As a new Pew Internet survey reveals, 50% of all American adults now use a social network compared to 5% six years ago, so clearly the significance of social media can't be underestimated. However, not all social networks are young, fresh and exciting anymore... So, at a time when the relationship between social media and the public seems to be nearing the end of the honeymoon period and signs of so-called 'social media fatigue' are starting to creep in, Google+ has provided a little something to stoke the fire.

Google+ continues to be a magnet for media attention, but of late the press has been shining the spotlight on it's 'real name policy'. Google effectively wants you to be you in order to use its social network, as Mashable reports.

So what does this mean for journalists? Well it might mean that if you like to keep your professional identity and your personal life separate in the online world, this could be an issue.

In the case of one blogger and journalist, it has caused quite a headache. GrrlScientist, who writes for The Guardian science blog Punctuated Equilibrium, recently released an open letter to Google, asking them to reinstate her account, her first appeal to the company having failed to do so, despite her explanation of the finer legal points of the matter and insisting that GrrlScientist was actually an established professional pseudonym.

As journalism has now become irrevocably embroiled in the online world, more and more journalists will have to face the choice of whether to create a digital footprint that combines both business and pleasure. The idea of a 'personal brand' has become increasingly important; social media is intimately bound up with the image that a person projects to the rest of the world and writers may decide, for many valid reasons, to create a firm divide between their work and their personal use of social media.

What Google is effectively saying is that using a pseudonym for the purposes of anonymity is now unacceptable. The only way to separate personal and private life is via privacy settings, which are very well integrated into Google+ via the 'circles' feature; but still, you have to be you.

Despite the fact that Google's real name policy hasn't gone down so well, this hasn't stopped the international growth of Google+. In fact, it is succeeding where many other international social networks, like Facebook, failed: in Japan.

Unlike other networks, Google have been smart enough to incorporate menus in Japanese into its latest product, so whereas in the past the Japanese networks like Mixi and Gree have had the field to themselves, Google+ has been welcomed with open arms.

Is Google + worth sacrificing a pseudonym or a carefully crafted professional identity? Should more social networks include a broader array of language options so, if nothing else, there is at least more competition to provide a social network that is truly global, inclusive and - potentially- anonymous?

Sources: Biz Report , Guardian, Mashable , Medialaws.eu , Meme Burn ,