Google+ abandons need to use real names

July 16, 2014
The Google logo seen at headquarters in Mountain View, California on September 2, 2011

Google+ apologized Tuesday and stopped requiring people to use their real names while mingling in the online social network, as it looks to gain ground on market leader Facebook.

"When we launched Google+ over three years ago, we had a lot of restrictions on what name you could use on your profile," the California Internet titan said in a post at the social network.

"This helped create a community made up of real people, but it also excluded a number of people who wanted to be part of it without using their ."

Google said that it has been slowly loosening the requirement with changes such as letting people use YouTube account names, but conceded that the names policy got a bit muddled.

"Today, we are taking the last step: there are no more restrictions on what name you can use," Google said.

"We know you've been calling for this change for a while. We know that our names policy has been unclear, and this has led to some unnecessarily difficult experiences for some of our users.

"For this we apologize, and we hope that today's change is a step toward making Google+ the welcoming and inclusive place that we want it to be."

Explore further: Google to allow some nicknames on Plus service

Related Stories

Google shutting down Orkut social network

June 30, 2014

Google on Monday said it is shutting down Orkut, its "first foray into social networking," to focus on YouTube, Blogger, and Google+ services that have proven more popular.

Google+ opens up to teenagers

January 26, 2012

Google on Thursday opened up Google+ to teenagers, just days after loosening the rules about using real names on the social network.

Google social network adding verified accounts

August 14, 2012

Google announced that it will let users of its online social network have verified accounts with names or brands in a manner similar to that offered at Facebook and Twitter.

Google to add user recommendations to advertising

October 15, 2013

Taking a page from Facebook, Google Inc. said Friday that it may start showing its users' recommendations and comments in advertising that appears on Google services and millions of other sites across the Web.

Recommended for you

Volvo to supply Uber with self-driving cars (Update)

November 20, 2017

Swedish carmaker Volvo Cars said Monday it has signed an agreement to supply "tens of thousands" of self-driving cars to Uber, as the ride-sharing company battles a number of different controversies.


Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Lex Talonis
2.3 / 5 (8) Jul 16, 2014
Oh finally - the fucking morons at Google, and their corporate bullshit of tying to force everyone into playing their game of getting all the data harvested, and sold to advertising agencies for revenue and distributed freely amongst the NSA and their "affiliates".

They have caught on that their nazi crap has ruined the internet experience for so many people and that most people really don't want to share all their information with everyone else.

And that Youtube was both profitable and FUN - and everyone liked it and that was before the idiots at Google bought it and then add saturated it....

And then forced their Google + shit on everyone...

Basic Stats:

Google plus dislike

About 444,000,000 results


Add in all the trickery and manipulation the shit heads in Google used on people to force them to get signed up and stay signed up.....

Fuck Google +.
5 / 5 (3) Jul 16, 2014
I can't believe they're only realizing that NOW.
4.6 / 5 (5) Jul 16, 2014
I can't believe they're only realizing that NOW.

I guess they wanted to use this as a unique feature in order to avoid becoming just another facebook clone:
- No spam bots
- No sockpuppets
- No fakes
- No company/government paid PR swarms

And I can see where some of this has merit. On the other hand the realtive anonymity behind a fantasy name is only just that: relative. If you think you can express 'dissident' opinions and not be trackeable using a fake account then you better think again.
4 / 5 (2) Jul 16, 2014
So, they really think names were real???
Captain Stumpy
4.3 / 5 (3) Jul 16, 2014
And I can see where some of this has merit
the problem with it was people like me- I've been known professionally and socially (as well as to family) as Truck Captain Stumpy for longer than I've been known by my given name
No spam bots
No sockpuppets
No fakes
No company/government paid PR swarms
This isn't true either... FB is loaded with all of those... I know people who generated 20+ profiles on FB just to play stupid FB games and get stuff in the game... now THAT is CRAZY!

plus, like Anda says- there was never a guarantee that it was a REAL name (A friend has a VERY derogatory name, but with a decidedly Asiatic twist that I guess made it OK for Google+)

There will always be ways around the rules
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (2) Jul 16, 2014
Fuck Google +
don't hold back... tell us how you REALLY feel
Add in all the trickery and manipulation the shit heads in Google used on people to force them to get signed up and stay signed up
Not sure what you are referring to here. I've had my google accounts since they were beta-testing it (3: one personal, one professional for research, one Fire Dept. related for others to find me)
I went a YEAR without checking one e-mail address (professional) because I had no internet and I was not working on research at the time... Only check that one once a month or so still... During that year, I only checked the other two four times

It was Yahoo and Hotmail that required a log-in every so often to keep accounts open, not Google that I know of (unless something changed)

Can you provide information/links about the "get signed up stay signed up" comment?
Captain Stumpy
3 / 5 (2) Jul 16, 2014
On the other hand the realtive anonymity behind a fantasy name is only just that: relative. If you think you can express 'dissident' opinions and not be trackeable using a fake account then you better think again
absolutely correct about this
it has always been EASY to track the uninformed user... or the typical computer user.
Most people are so unaware of internet protocols that even though they create anonymous e-mails under different names, they forget that there is still a link to their computer.

The advanced users and hackers learned a long time ago that even with their ability, there are still ways to track them, which then begs the question: why would an average user think they are safe when an advanced hacker isn't?

Even with TOR and other like networks/protocols etc, there is still a link to the individual laptop/PC... and as long as you know at least SOME info (like username for login and general time on-line) they can be TRACKED in real time...
1 / 5 (2) Jul 16, 2014
What bothers me is that anonymity's only a refuge of cowardice for people with no debating skills. For the rest of us it's the WD40 of informal discourse.. the free exchange of BS, the whole raison d'etre of da Webz, innit. Our words should stand or fall on merit, unencumbered by irrelevant baggage. I don't care 'who' anyone IS if it's just a casual kickabout... making everyone walk on eggshells ruins a good banter, leaving it forced, emasculated and lacking spontaneity. Compare the anemic tone of replies on YouTube to the raucous humour of Liveleak - real names just kill any atmosphere. Handles are avatars for our raw ids, gloves-off tete á tete, keyboards at dawn, prove me wrong or STFU, muddy funsters..
not rated yet Jul 16, 2014
I've never been on the Facebook site and only have Google+ because Google forced it on everyone by breaking their other products without it. That said, there is no actual public content on my G+ profile and this change will not make me want to use G+.

Even though I've disabled everything I can see in G+, I note that I can see applications review of some contacts in Play, even though none of them have been added to my G+ account... Massive privacy hole.

The scary part is that I've seen a review from a client contact in another country that have very strong political and religious views that I do not share. If he could see my app reviews some of them might be offensive to him. This is all from my personal account on my Android phone that I use to manage phone contacts and had used to call him, not the company email account that was used to email him.
Lex Talonis
1 / 5 (2) Jul 17, 2014
Yeah I like the all in brawling / fisticuffs / vigorous discussions and what knot - from appraisal to ridicule - and strongly worded political fighting - for or against.

And anonymous style names - on vaguely anonymous sorts of terms, made that so much more interesting....

Trolling and baiting fundamentalist idealogues, be it religious, or some other fanatical sect, like railway / engineering / etc., used to be so much fun...

Spirited debate and informal relations and public discussions etc., were all so much more FUN and educational, before the idiot fucks in Google decided to formally gut it all by being good corporate shit heads intent on sharing everything you ever used, shared, knew, met, routes taken, photos, etc., etc., etc., with the entire world.

What sent me off the edge, was that THEY - the idiot fucks in Google, decided to add all the people I had ever emailed, to my status updates list?

"What? Some guy I asked for a price on dental agar casting resin 5 years ago?"
2 / 5 (2) Jul 17, 2014
I never used my real name at the web, Google+ the less and everything went OK with it (you just need an e-mail and occasionally phone number for registration, which can be indeed anonymous as well).

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.