Personalized Search Now Default

SEO and Privacy forever changed

[incrediBILL]

Google Blog [googleblog.blogspot.com]

Today we're helping people get better search results by extending Personalized Search to signed-out users worldwide

That's a staggering statement meaning that every computer accessing Google is now being personalized, signed in or not, so any desktop, laptop or kiosk will start tracking everything everyone does and you won't be able to access the same search results from any two machines.

The possible impact to all is staggering.

[smallcompany]

Does anyone have any thoughts on what this means for websites that use adwords as well as try their hand at seo? I.e. If someone has previously clicked on your advert then will your site appear higher in the natural results the next time they search?

I asked this already somewhere above, but:

1. Most of folks hanging around organic don't do AdWords
2. Everybody is too busy with privacy and other "big" stuff

P.S.
Unrelated:

Ah! getting close to 333, times 2, oh no, 666.

[Beachboy]

Prudence said:

"The decline and fall of Google....look out people, here comes BING."

It's quite an opening that Google has created for its competition. Humans being human, they usually try to improve on near perfection and screw it up. LOL Now, Microsoft's Bing can do to Google what Apple has been doing to Windows. Maybe they ought to hire the same two guys for the upcoming TV commercials.

If I were running Bing, I would slam Google very hard immediately, in a most memorable way, and keep slamming.

Nuke some popcorn and sit back. This ought to be interesting.

[zett]

If someone has previously clicked on your advert then will your site appear higher in the natural results the next time they search?

Why would it? First, Google claims that Adwords and search are strictly separated. Second, if there was a connection, why would they want to push you up in SERPs (improving your free traffic) when they KNOW that you are buying their ads (which they can moneize)?

[smallcompany]

I wouldn't waste time about how AdWords may affect sites that show in it in regards of their organic performance.

At this time, it is about how personalized organic results may affect the brain of an average searcher and make him/her click more/less onto AdWords ads.

I've been already made monkey by seeing my sites way up high in first spots (until I started using secondary browser without being logged on).

In a similar way (I guess), an average user will be now seeing sites in upper positions that many will not.
How this affects AdWords is yet to be figured, if anything can be figured today. I mean... how do you figure this now...

[loudspeaker]

If I were running Bing, I would slam Google very hard immediately, in a most memorable way, and keep slamming.

Not to give Microsoft any creative ideas, but if I were running Bing and had cash to promote it, I would do a simple attack ad: I would take the clip with Mr. Schmidt's exact quote, caption it ("Google's CEO") but otherwise leave almost unedited. Just one frame at the end... BING: we try/search harder.. and forget faster. Or something to that effect. Then buy millions of prime-time TV ad slots. Should be scary enough.

[edited by: loudspeaker at 7:51 am (utc) on Dec. 9, 2009]

[Hissingsid]

signor_john

my site doesn't even have a way to serve cookies

Just sign up for Google Analytics ;-)

Cheers

Sid

[TheMadScientist]

Just sign up for Google Analytics ;-)

LMAO...
Seriously, Sid, that's one of the funniest posts I've read.

Thanks.

[gn_wendy]

What does personalization mean for traffic?

I would go out on a limb, and say - not so much. Ignoring the privacy issues for a minute, G' has been using user behavior to influence the SERPs for some time.

Even though the user's (singular) SERPs may change dramatically in the next months users' (plural) SERPs may well remain similar, on a macro scale.

Think of your website as a product, say canned peaches. Up until now there was only one store selling all the (Google)world's goods. Now, everyone get's a local market optimizing goods for what customers are buying. This means some stores will put canned peaches in the back on the top shelf and other stores near the check-out counter. As a peach supplier, you will probably still sell as many peaches as before... that is unless everyone who buy's your peaches decide they don't like them.

Or am I being naïve here?

[lexipixel]

"...What we're doing today is expanding Personalized Search so that we can provide it to signed-out users as well. This addition enables us to customize search results for you based upon 180 days of search activity linked to an anonymous cookie in your browser..."

[googleblog.blogspot.com...]

Is Google Violating Minor's Privacy?

To review what info Google has tracked about you, you need to sign in to Google Web History, ( www.google.com/history/ ).

Yes, it's a catch 22 -- you need to give them more info so you can see what info they've already collected [about you], but, there's a problem if you are a minor, (under 18 in the US);

In Google's Universal Terms of Service, there is a section, (which most people under age 18 in the USA could not fully understand, and would probably not bother to read), it says:

2. Accepting the Terms

2.1 In order to use the Services, you must first agree to the Terms. You may not use the Services if you do not accept the Terms.

2.2 You can accept the Terms by:

(A) clicking to accept or agree to the Terms, where this option is made available to you by Google in the user interface for any Service; or

(B) by actually using the Services. In this case, you understand and agree that Google will treat your use of the Services as acceptance of the Terms from that point onwards.

2.3 You may not use the Services and may not accept the Terms if (a) you are not of legal age to form a binding contract with Google, or (b) you are a person barred from receiving the Services under the laws of the United States or other countries including the country in which you are resident or from which you use the Services.

Personalized Search, (and the underlying stored 180 days worth of data), is "opt-out", and many times Google will be collecting this data from children.

So by either disallowing minors access so they can review or remove the information -- or by Google inadvertantly allowing access, in-effect entering into an agreement with minor(s), I think Google may need to put a "You must be 18 to use Google" notice on every page, search box and click-trackable ad, or make Personalized Search, Web History, and other forms of tracking opt-in.

Next Legal Issue: How Google is mean to puppies.

(Disclaimer: No puppies were harmed in the production of this forum post.)

[driller41]

Can someone tell me if I disable all cookies and only allow the few I need, what will I achieve.

[oddsod]

Good point, lexipixel!

Just sign up for Google Analytics ;-)

SJ, don't you have Adsense on your site?

[James_WV]

Personally, the privacy issues are secondary for me - Google already had this data on you, all it's doing is using the data to serve you different results. Once I've figured out how this is going to affect us from a business POV then I can start worrying about what they'll use my data for next, but in the meantime I have a couple of questions:

1) Is this keyword specific? If not, is it niche specific - i.e. if I search for "locationxyz history" and click on www.yoursite.com, does it make www.yoursite.com more likely to appear for "locationxyz widget"?
If so, then more content generation for non-money terms is the way forward.

2) Will AdWords clicks affect these Personalized Search rankings? Bit of confusion on this from what I've read. I can see this from both angles:

a) Google's always been at pains to keep AdWords separate from organic rankings - I've never subscribed to the conspiracy theories about Ad spend affecting rankings

b) On the other hand, if they're looking at personalized relevance, why should adWords clicks be treated any differently? If you find a site you like for a certain KW - should it matter to your personalized search what area of the results page it displays on.

[Reno]

...why should adWords clicks be treated any differently? If you find a site you like for a certain KW - should it matter to your personalized search what area of the results page it displays on.

Very good point, but you're using logic here, and logic does not seem to apply to this turn of events. The decision to make opt-in the default is, to my way of thinking, first and foremost about the accumulation of personal data which, as I've said, is an extremely valuable commodity in today's world, and if left unchallenged by the courts/legislatures, will significantly fatten Google's bank account, thank you very much.

*******************************

[signor_john]

signor_john
my site doesn't even have a way to serve cookies

Just sign up for Google Analytics ;-)

Cute, but just for the record, my original statement was:

I don't plant tracking cookies myself (my site doesn't even have a way to serve cookies), but my ad networks do, my affiliate partners do, and for all I know, maybe my hosting service does.

My point was (and is) that most of us benefit from tracking cookies to one degree or another, so let's not pretend that we're all as pure as the driven snow (to use an expression inspired by what's going on outside my office window this morning). Still, I'm willing to live with a government-mandated "cookie warning" if that's the right thing to do. That's certainly less hypocritical than screaming about "privacy" while benefiting from tracking cookies on one's site.

[Reno]

That's certainly less hypocritical than screaming about "privacy" while benefiting from tracking cookies on one's site.

You're comparing apples and oranges. The complaint is not about tracking cookies, the complaint is about data accumulation that is person-specific and is automatically implemented unless the person goes through the opt-out process. It's comparable to getting a new phone number and automatically having it given to telemarketers, unless you specifically say to keep it private. The analogy is not perfect, but it's close enough.

.......................

[netmeg]

I don't think it's a very close analogy.

"If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place," Schmidt tells CNBC [...]

This was a real bucket-head way of saying this; he should have said "If you have something you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it on the internet where anyone can spider it, index it, and pass it along to third parties". I have long considered expectations of real privacy on the planet's biggest honking network to be a pipe dream, and it's what I've always told my clients, too. Common sense should tell us that.

Google isn't really doing anything that Comcast doesn't do when they track what I watch on my digital cable box, or that Kroger doesn't do via its Kroger card when I buy groceries.

[wheel]

---

System: The following 2 messages were spliced on to this thread from: http://www.webmasterworld.com/google/4040114.htm [webmasterworld.com] by engine - 3:39 pm on Dec. 9, 2009 (utc 0)

---

[dailytech.com...]

Google CEO Eric Schmidt commented to CNBC, "If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place."

I told you so.

[engine]

It's all smoke and mirrors.

From that same piece...

The more troublesome comment is Mr. Schmidt's indictment of those who wish privacy. One must also consider Mr. Schmidt's own demands for personal privacy. Mr. Schmidt banned CNET, one of the top tech news sites on the web, from Google for an entire year for publishing information about the CEO, including his salary; his neighborhood, some of his hobbies and political donations. Where did CNET find this info? From none other than Google itself.

hehehe

If you're up to no good online, your ISP will have the records. It's about choice, and Google are missing the point.

I repeat again, it's smoke and mirrors.

[Hissingsid]

The issue isn't the cookie it is what is behind it. In Google's case a unique ID stored in a cookie is the key to a potentially huge repository of data about your web browsing history. That data is being used in a way that most users of Google never expected or intended, if they even suspected that Google was collecting the data in the first place.

Cheers

Sid

[dusky]

With the emergence and popularity of wi-fi technology, I'd say half of the computer users at home at least are using an average of 3-4 laptops all connected wirelessly to the same router and broadband connection, and of course the same IP address. Now, The Bloggs family surf the Internet daily, but none has a G* account. Mrs Bloggs is into online shopping for food, 35-55 stuff, catching up with her favorite soap opera and lifestyle, Joe junior is into online games, music or sport, social networking and the odd peep into naughty sites, Laura is into online dating, hair, nail and beauty, comparing nightclub photos on book face, Joe senior is into SUVs and their fan sites, Golf, still campaigning for the Repub. party thinking W D Bush's brother is the messiah to bring the GORY days back (the L left out for a purpose), and of course logging into forums to troubleshoot his router and wi-fi which keeps going wrong. Now how's G* is going personalize to all four of the family?

Further complication as said above, what of Internet Cafes, large college campuses, Army barracks... mainly wirelessly connected to the same IP, static or dynamic!

I can see the language and country or region maybe possible, nothing else, so the outcome will be chaos. Imagine Laura searching for "night spots free access" as she is always searching for a freebie night club access and cut price alcohol and get "do you mean wi-fi hotspots free access" or presents here with all things wireless at the top of SERPs, G* thinking, here goes Joe senior again about the same old problem with his wi-fi router!

[dusky]

Oh, not forgetting, they all use each others laptops most times, Joe senior bought 4 identical ones, so the cookies are sporadically all mingled up in each other's machines!

[signor_john]

Now how's G* is going personalize to all four of the family? ... I can see the language and country or region maybe possible, nothing else, so the outcome will be chaos.

If it's chaos, won't Google have to either pull back or lose market share? (IMHO, it's unlikely that Google would continue to push a product that was driving users to other search engines.)

[Leosghost]

To all those who keep mentioning what comcast does or what netflix does etc ..

We are not all in the USA so that is irrelevant..
Gorgs new silent default opt in policy is illegal in a least the EU ..and certain aspects of it may well as pointed out by lexipixel with regards to the 18 year old ( tracking of minors ) question be illegal in the USA also ..
What you as an adult agree to or not with comcast or your local ISP does not affect the law in another country ..or even your own..

[Hissingsid]

The last time I asked my Adwords rep why they wouldn't tell "on average how many repeat clicks on one of my ads does a user do" I was told "we couldn't tell you that without breaching data protection laws". I didn't want to know the IP address of the person or what the unique ID of the person was all I wanted to know was the statistical average. I know various ways to get this information but it would be much handier if it was a column on my Adwords account.

When they want to make lame excuses they hide behind data protection but when they are using data for their own ends they are very happy to do so without fear of redress. I know I can set a cookie myself and collect IPs and repeat visits or analyse my log files but why won't Google give me the one piece of data I really want? I think we all know the answer.

Cheers

Sid

[walkman]

Google CEO:
"If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place."

Is that a license for one to take his laptop and post the contents (minus trade secrets) online? I am sure he is an upstanding citizen with nothing to hide.

[signor_john]

Is that a license for one to take his laptop and post the contents (minus trade secrets) online? I am sure he is an upstanding citizen with nothing to hide.

And that has what to do with Google Personalized Search? (Surely you aren't under the impression that Google Search is posting users' tracking data online for all the world to see?)

[walkman]

And that has what to do with Google Personalized Search? (Surely you aren't under the impression that Google Search is posting users' tracking data online for all the world to see?)

His quote and apparently his attitude:
"If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place."

Is he hiding anything in his laptop? I doubt it

[Leosghost]

His attitude is disturbing ..to say the least

but the immediate point is ..

you need to be more worried about what he is hiding in your laptop with his silent default optin cookie ..because he sure isn't telling you that he puts the cookie in there

unless you count mentioning it on an obscure blog on a friday ..as informing the worldwide public ..

I dont ..nor do many legal authorities ..and governments

[surfer67]

I just visited a website that sells boots and from there visited a site about how to install a tile floor and the ads on the tile floor site were all ads for boots.

[carguy84]

I had no idea Google fanboys existed. Apple yes, Google no.

~

I have no problem with the privacy concerns, I have a problem with the worse search results.