Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from

Forum Moderators: buckworks & eWhisper & skibum

Message Too Old, No Replies

Google Brings "Not Provided" to AdWords



8:15 pm on Apr 9, 2014 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member netmeg is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 10+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

Fasten your seatbelts, it's gonna be a bumpy night.

Today, we are extending our efforts to keep search secure by removing the query from the referer on ad clicks originating from SSL searches on Google.com.

Official announcement:


Searchengineland's take:



9:36 pm on Apr 9, 2014 (gmt 0)

Top Contributors Of The Month

Luckily we've already targeted all our exact match keywords and don't expect much to change. I think this move will hurt adwords growth more than anything.


10:36 pm on Apr 9, 2014 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member bwnbwn is a WebmasterWorld Top Contributor of All Time 5+ Year Member Top Contributors Of The Month

Click fraud just got a lot easier. I have been seeing this in my tracking for some time and feel it just isn't right.

Keeping search secure that I am paying for please tell me the logic in this. This is like buying a boat and you ask how big is the motor, they reply that is classified info we can't give you this information.


4:12 am on Apr 10, 2014 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member

Mining for Negs? I hope they give us a report of words (not keywords, just words) that flow in, that are not words found among our keywords.


11:02 am on Apr 10, 2014 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member

The funny part about this is Google is 'securing' search queries for privacy reasons yet turns around and shares the data with intelligence agencies.

"NSA general counsel Rajesh De says big tech companies like Yahoo and Google provided ‘full assistance’ in legally mandated collection of data"


12:49 pm on Apr 10, 2014 (gmt 0)

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member

I'm amazed at how few advertisers are utilising the ValueTrack parameters. They've been around for ages and using them gives you all the information most bid management tools charge a high premium for.

When you have advertisers using tracking URL's with names like "Top_10_Keywords" for the adgroup or campaign name then taking away something like keyword referral data is likely to only harm a very small number of advertisers and might need tool providers to find different ways to get information onto a landing page instead of it coming from a q= parameter as it does now.


10:41 pm on Apr 10, 2014 (gmt 0)

5+ Year Member

This is being blown WAY out of proportion and I'm pretty sure that the title of this thread must have been written before the actual announcement.

It's just the search query being removed from the URL. We're not losing the matched search query data from GA or in the "All" report in AdWords. The matched queries data is still available through the API.

I don't know ANYONE who's still using the search query in the URL for anything other than putting the matched query into their landing page for dynamic relevance (which more often than not just looks messy anyway).

In terms of AdWords management, keyword research and using AdWords matched search query data for SEO... it's business as usual here.

It really is amazing how many people are freaking out over this. Very little has changed.


5:01 am on Apr 11, 2014 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member

I disagree.. As an advertiser (12 years) with low search volume but a very high CPC, this takes away my ability to track individual customers clicks in a real time basis on a geo level. Mashed up data in adwords reporting 24 to 48 hour later really hurts my ability to adjust bids on the fly with no attribution to traffic to a certain visitor. I can see where big volume advertisers aren't affected as much as they are use to 10'000 foot metrics... I pay for street level... (used to anyway...)


7:46 am on Apr 11, 2014 (gmt 0)

10+ Year Member

+1 to codeblue

For anyone who has hand-rolled their own internal dashboards and reporting (which would be anyone with a website older than 5+ years, I assume), this is a major suck.

Featured Threads

Hot Threads This Week

Hot Threads This Month