2. Jellyfish POV
SEO just got harder< again
Encrypted natural search data, and what it means for online
marketers
Would you like to understand which SEO keywords are driving
traffic, interaction and conversions on your website? Of course,
because it allows us to focus SEO effort (via on-site optimisation,
links and social) on the best performing keywords in your target
portfolio.
So how does losing 10%, 20%, 30% or an even higher % of this
invaluable insight sound? Well, it sounds like a bad, bad deal for any
brand currently active in SEO activity. But that’s the reality as of
October this year, and it’s not likely to change. So what’s this all
about, how is it affecting websites, and what can we do about this
issue?
Background
There’s been an avalanche of discussion and comment over
Google’s Q3 announcement regarding the encryption of organic
search results, and resulting impact for online marketing
professionals. Here’s the official / original post from the Google
th
blog, October 18 2011, titled ‘making search more secure’:
This change encrypts your search queries and Google’s results
page. When you search from https://www.google.com, websites
you visit from our organic search listings will still know that you
came from Google, but won't receive information about each
individual query.
In other words, for signed in Google users, analytics won’t clarify
the keywords used to drive SEO engagement on site. According to
the Google Analytics blog, the change will mean that:
The organic click will be identified as coming from Google.
The organic click will be identified as "organic" but will no
longer display the query string.
The organic click will be identified under the token "not
provided" within Organic Search Traffic Keyword reporting.
PAGE 2
3. Jellyfish POV
SEO just got harder< again
Secure site searches that lead to clicks via search ads, will
still provide the search (keyword).
So, webmasters / publishers will see PPC channel data at keyword
level, but not SEO data from signed in users.
Comment from the digital marketing community was (to say the
least) unenthusiastic, and a flurry of data quickly followed,
attempting to clarify the impact of this change on the visibility of
keyword level SEO data.
Some data – who is signed in, and how is it affecting websites?
According to Search Engine Watch:he estimated number floating
around in online rumors is "7% of people searching Google.com",
which is about 69 million people worldwide according to Eli
Goodman from comScore
OK, what does the data look like? First up, analysis indicates that
Matt Cutts' initial prediction that the percentage of keywords
reported with (not provided) would be within a single digit, appears
to be a little wide of the mark:
In fact, the not provided % is around 15%.
Econsultancy also reported high figures; ‘a staggering 362 page
views out of a total 1,138 are showing no keyword data. That’s
around 33%. One in three search referrals from the US do not pass
PAGE 3
4. Jellyfish POV
SEO just got harder< again
on any search query data.’
But hold on< recent Search Engine Watch commentary states that:
‘The amount of data being hidden thanks to Google's SSL search
decision has been climbing steadily but now seems to be levelling out
at 9% of traffic’.
PAGE 4
5. Jellyfish POV
SEO just got harder< again
So, estimates vary from 10% to 30%.....so far.
And a final slice of data from SEOmoz: here's a visualization of 60
sites' analytics data, showing the self-reported percent of their
Google search traffic that used keyword "(not provided)"
<.up to 12% and growing.
How will this % change in the future?
As Google services proliferate, aiming to land-grab the ‘always
logged in’ Facebook type user, we can expect to see a broader
spread of users who are continually signed in to Google.
Google’s historic focus on new media early adopters (a small /
single digit % of all web users) will evolve as users embrace Google
+ (Google co-founder and chief executive Larry Page has claimed
that its online social networking service Google+ has got 40 million
PAGE 5
6. Jellyfish POV
SEO just got harder< again
users), and new services such as Google Music and Google Voice
(both US only at this point) are rolled out to a broader global
audience.
So why encrypt this data?
Because we’re grown-ups, let’s set aside Google’s stated
explanation (reminder – ‘making search more secure’!).
Here are the contenders:
Google wants to shut out ad networks who use keyword level data
for new types of targeting based on keyword level search data (we
say - believable, but limited in ambition).
Google wants to make analytics users cough up for a premium
version where this data is not encrypted (we say – again, believable,
but hardly a route to riches?)
Google wants to encourage additional adwords spend at the
expense of SEO budgets (we say – likely – see below for why)
The (just?) war against SEO
Consider the following: Google’s main algorithm updates have
made the ‘business’ of SEO progressively more difficult. To clarify,
there’s nothing inherently wrong with making it harder to ‘game’
SEO results; search spam is spam, and better sites deserve better
visibility. It’s just that the growth of more subtle and distributed
signalling mechanism obstructs the ROI principles around SEO,
because results are harder to predict, achieve and maintain. Which
maybe is how it should be.
Google claim that SEO data is still there; for some time, Google
Webmaster Central has allowed sites to discover the terms that
people are using to reach their web sites. This will continue to be
offered, and that will remain a welcome alternative to the loss of
referrer data. However, this does not provide clarity between
keywords and vital analytics insights such as goals, conversion
PAGE 6
7. Jellyfish POV
SEO just got harder< again
paths etc. A half baked solution at best.
UK companies spend significant amounts on SEO; about 20% less
than PPC, but still a good chunk of change. If SEO ROI was no longer
clear, where would you spend it?
And the killer blow; PPC data remains fully visible. So if this is about
privacy, why, why, why? Case rested.
Last words
Reminder – those data estimates show that right now, the best to
worst case scenarios are between 10% - 30%. Actual data and %s
will be site specific and strongly influenced by your user base. So, do
ensure that your analytics are properly configured – you need to
understand impact on traffic engagement, leads, conversions;
ideally, all goals.
For now keep a close eye on those (not provided) numbers. For the
future, there is no fix, unless Google decides to revert back. As they
say, there is always hope. And a final word from SEOmoz’s Rand
Fishkin:
‘The underselling of the change as being "single digits" was lame.
The hypocrisy around keyword privacy sucks. And their motivations
are questionable at best. But the crummiest part is the impact the
change will have. It won't put any black hats out of business, won't
stop any malware or hacking, and won't add a shred of value to the
Internet. But it will make it harder for marketers and site builders to
measure, understand and improve for their audience. The net
impact will be a slightly worse web, and Google's claim of privacy
will only protect them from criticism because it's a far easier
explanation than the truth.’
PAGE 7
