30 replies to this topic

[cre8pc]

Danny Sullivan reports Google Now Personalizes Everyone’s Search Results

Default is opt-in, not opt out

The short story is this. By watching what you click on in search results, Google can learn that you favor particular sites. For example, if you often search and click on links from Amazon that appear in Google’s results, over time, Google learns that you really like Amazon. In reaction, it gives Amazon a ranking boost. That means you start seeing more Amazon listings, perhaps for searches where Amazon wasn’t showing up before.

The results are custom tailored for each individual. For example, let’s say someone else prefers Barnes & Nobles. Over time, Google learns that person likes Barnes & Noble. They begin to see even more Barnes & Nobles listings, rather than Amazon ones.

[eKstreme]

So let me get this straight: to completely opt-out, you'll have to login permanently? Which moron came up with that scheme?

[cre8pc]

And if Google sees 1 computer = 1 user, what if multiple users? What if 1 opt-ins, 1 opts-out on 1 PC?

Several user behaviors there.

[EGOL]

Wow... this is really going to overly favor websites like amazon and ebay that already have a huge reach.

The rich will get richer.

[Michael_Martinez]

You do not have to log in permanently. You have to PAUSE your Web History (while logged out) and clear all items.

This is a remarkably bold move on Google's part. I suspect they are going to let people clean up their own search results. But how will people be able to discover new content? I suspect they will have to resort to some sort of Personal Search Injection (just as they use Universal Search Injection for News, Images, Video, etc.).

The SEO community now has something to buzz about for a few weeks.

[jonbey]

Chrome > Ingognito

Or FF equivalent. Just keep one window open for search. But yeah, sounds like a pretty stupid idea. Maybe time to fire up the Adwords campaign again.....

Clicking leads to increased rank? Funny, as I heard that the other day. It was on the tele, so I assumed that the reporter just made it up, but in relation to the Mrs. Obama monkey image that was on Google, they said that one problem was that the more people that clicked the photo, the higher it appeared in the photo search pages. They had spoken to Google, but they could have made that bit up themselves.

[Wit]

I wonder why. Except - indeed - as a favour to G's old friends. Ugh {goes off to find bucket}

[swainzy]

This is really bad. I don't want anyone making those decisions for me.

[cre8pc]

I asked Danny Sullivan some questions on this via Twitter.

I was curious about library computers or situations like mine, where there are many computers in the house and we all use them. The kids are not allowed on test computers, but they do get on my laptop or sneak on the main test desktop to do homework in my office.

I wondered how google would track usage behavior with multiple users on one pc?

Danny said google goes by browser usage, not by person. One IP can have many user behaviors based on the browser they use.

This, to me, is still screwed up. I use FF, IE and Chrome and husband uses Chrome, but the kids use FF and IE and sometimes FF, depending on which computer they sit at.

Yes, you switch opt in and opt out on and off but who wants to keep doing that? Yes, history is kept for 180 days. If you want to hide it, clear it.

Sooo, jealous girlfriend finds bf consistently clears his history and what does she think?

You can let Google fiddle with your SERPS or opt out. Its more of the be all things to all people Google mentality.

[eKstreme]

Is this tracking cookie based or IP based? Does it use Javascript?

Both are easy to block for google.com/* .

[cre8pc]

Browser based was all he said...

[SEOigloo]

The thing is, if Google is going to continue to evolve in this way, where *you* see a site ranking, whether opted in or out, doesn't matter. Most people will have no notion that this is going on and will be seeing personalized results. Whatever sites are appealing to the most people, and therefor appearing for the highest number of searches, will have maximum visibility...so unless you can sit at the computers of everyone else in the world (or unless someone develops a tool that approximates this), it's just not going to matter anymore where an SEO is seeing clients rank...at least to the the unknown degree that SERPs will now contain personalized results. I wish they'd tell Danny what the % is, as this is really the only way I can think of that we'd understand the extent of the effects of this change.

Edited by SEOigloo, 05 December 2009 - 05:51 PM.

[DonnaFontenot]

Exactly. There's no point in opting out so that you can see the "real" rankings, when the rest of the world is seeing personalized SERPs.

It's kinda like the old, "Does a tree falling in the forest make a sound if no one is around to hear it?"

If no one is seeing the non-personalized results, except the SEOs who opt out, then opting out is just a lesson in futility.

I also agree that knowing a % would be useful. If results are personalized to a very minor degree, then maybe it's not that big a deal, but we may not ever be given that information.

[Wit]

I still do not see the point of "personalised search". I tend to search for NEW stuff every time. If I wanna look back of some of the important OLD stuff, I'll check my bookmarks (or even my browser's search history). No, if I search for something (again), chances are I wanna find the best, most relevant results.

Is that weird? Am I in fact a raving loon? :paddedcell:

[jonbey]

Wit, I am with you there. I would find it very annoying if every time I did some research I would have to ignore the first 3 pages because those sites only came up because I had already read them.

But, the search engines are there for the average user, and the average user probably does a lot less searching and analysis than any of us.

If it is true that it is browser based, then that is easy to get around. For SEO there will still be a clean starting point. Personalised results will only show after the initial searches, and you will still need your SEO to get in there first, and need your quality titles and descriptions to get clicked first.

[DonnaFontenot]

:offtopic:

Yes, Wit, you are a raving loon :panic:

:offtopic:

(This is the kind of post I wish I could make inline (within someone else's post), like a threaded comment, so as to not disturb the flow of the original thread).

[earlpearl]

1. (agree with Donna above)

2. I like to check serps. I know with owning operating local businesses of 2 types in a couple of local markets we have one business type that normally generates a vast majority of new visitors most of the time. serps will count for new visitors.

3. For vistors for the other topic we know there are a lot of repeat visitors over time. I'm roughly thinking we need to continue to send emails all the time to keep on top of existing customers regardless of whom they first clicked on.

4. Frankly I'm going to have people from our businesses visit local libraries. They are going to search on a variety of local terms...they are going to click on our sites. I've already tested it.

A) I'm surprised to see the volume of people using public library web connections.
B) Its been in existance for a while. I've tried it a couple of times, revisited libraries and the repeated searches I did keep showing our businesses at #1 for serps.

Does it make a difference? Maybe a little one. Not sure...but I like the advantage and frankly I'm surprised to see the volumes at libraries.

Frankly, if it wasn't browser based but "connection/server" based I'd have our people visit starbucks, coffee houses/restaurants/etc. where people can connect via the businesses connection. :nanatype:

[Michael_Martinez]

For the record, they are using a "secret" cookie that is not attached to google.com.

[eKstreme]

No cookie can be secret, really. It has to be stored by the browser and it has to be sent over the wire. There are multiple points of interception.

[glyn]

Let's see how this goes down with European legislation on privacy. I for one will be writing.

I don't think it's going to stand up personally but there's lots of examples of Online being completely contrary to common sense and legality.

As for a hidden cookie, that's just going to give legislators an even bigger incentive because...and exactly how personalized can a session be if a user has only accessed at an internet cafe. In fact, as I doubt that most cafe's will clean the cache and cookies, it's more likely that this change is going to damage results by showing personalized results for sessions that are completely at odds with what the current user is wanting to see.

Funny.