For nearly two years, marketers have been frustrated by a steadily increasing percentage of keywords (not provided). Recent changes by Google have sent those numbers soaring. The site Not Provided Count now reports an average of nearly 74% of keywords not provided, and speculation abounds that it won't be long before 100% of keywords are masked. Without that referral data, our tasks as Internet marketers become far more difficult—but not impossible.
In this special Whiteboard Tuesday, Rand covers what marketers can do to make up for this drastic change, finding data from other sources to stay on top of their SEO efforts.
For reference, here's a still image of today's whiteboard!
Video Transcription
Howdy, Moz fans, and welcome to another edition of Whiteboard Friday! Today I'm going to talk about this extremely troublesome and worrisome problem that Google has expanded "keyword (not provided)" potentially to 100% of all organic referrals. This isn't necessarily that they've flipped the entire switch, and everyone's going to see it this week, but certainly over the next several months, it's been suggested, we may receive no keyword data at all in referrals from Google. Very troubling and concerning, obviously, if you're a web marketer.
I think it should be very troubling and concerning if you're a web user as well, because marketers don't use this data to do evil things or invade people's privacy. Marketers use this data to make the web a better place. The agreement that marketers have always had—that website creators have always had—with search engines, since their inception was, "sure, we'll let you crawl our sites, you provide us with the keyword data so that we can improve the Internet together. I think this is Google abusing their monopolistic position in the United States. Unfortunately, I don't really see a way out of it. I don't think marketers can make a strong enough case politically or to consumer groups to get this removed. Maybe the EU can eventually.
But in any case, let's deal with the reality that we're faced with today, which is that keyword not provided may be 100% of your referrals, and so keyword data is essentially gone. We don't know when Google sends a visit—Bing, to their credit, and to Microsoft's credit, enduringly has kept that data accessible—but we don't know when Google sends a visit to our sites and pages, what that person searched for. Previously, we could do some sampling—now we can't even do that.
There are some big tasks that we use that data for, and so to start with, I want to try and identify the uses for keyword referral data, at least the very important ones as I perceive them—there are certainly many more.
Number one: finding opportunities to improve a page's performance or its ranking. If you see that a page of yours is receiving a lot of search traffic, or that a keyword is sending a lot of search traffic (or even a little bit of search traffic), but the page is not ranking very well, you know that by improving that page's ranking you have an opportunity to earn a lot more search traffic. That's a very valuable thing as a marketer. You can also see if a search query is sending traffic to a page, but that page has a high bounce rate for that traffic, low pages-per-visit, low conversion rate, you know, "hey, I'm not doing a good job serving the visitor; I need to improve how the page addresses that." That's one of the key things we use keyword referral data for.
Secondarily: connecting rank improvement efforts—things that we do in the SEO world to move up our rankings—to the traffic growth that we receive from them. This is very important for consultants and for agencies, and for in-house SEOs as well, to show our value to our managers, and our clients—it's really, really tough to have this data taken away.
C: Understanding how your searchers perceive your brand and your content. When we look down the list of phrases that sent us traffic, we could see things like "oh, this is how people are thinking about my brand, or thinking about this product I launched, or thinking about this content that I've put out." Really challenging to do that nowadays.
And D: uncovering keyword opportunities. We could certainly see, "this is sending a small amount of traffic, this is doing some long-tail stuff, hey—let's turn this into a broader piece of content. Let's try and optimize for some of those keyword phrases that we're barely ranking on." Or, we have a page that's not really addressing that keyword phrase that we're ranking on. We can address that. We can improve that.
So I'm going to try and tackle some relatively simplistic ways, and I'm not going to walk through all the details you would need to do this, but I think many folks in the SEO and marketing sphere will address these over the weeks and months to come.
Starting with A. How do I find opportunities to improve a page's ranking or its performance with users when I can't see keyword referral data? How do I know which page people are coming to? Thankfully, we can use the connection—the intersection of a few different sources of data. Pages that are receiving search visits is a big one, and this is going to be used throughout—instead of looking at keyword-level data, we're going to be looking at page-level data. Which pages received referral visits from Google Search? Thankfully, that's still data that we do get, and that'll likely stay with us, because we can always see a referral source, and we know which pages are loaded. So, even if Google Analytics were to remove that, I think a third-party analytics provider would step in.
Pages receiving search visits plus rank-tracking data can get us a little close to this, because we can essentially say, "hey, we know this page is ranking well for these five or ten keywords that we have some reasonable expectation that they have keyword search volume. They're receiving search visits, and yet they're not performing well, or they're not ranking particularly well, so improving them should be able to drive up our search traffic, improving their performance with users should be able to drive up our conversion rate optimization.
Optionally, we could also add in things like Google Webmaster Tools or AdWords data; AdWords data being used on they keyword side to fill in for, "hey, what's the volume that a keyword is getting," and Google Webmaster Tools data to be able to see a list of some keywords that maybe are sending us traffic. Dr. Pete wrote a good post recently about the relative accuracy of Google Webmaster Tools, and while unfortunately it's not as good as any of the other methods, it's still not awful, and so that data is potentially usable.
This will give us a list of pages that get search visits, or are targeting important search terms, that rank, and that have the potential to improve. So this gets us to the answer to this question. This used to be really simple to get at, now it's more difficult, but still possible.
B. Connecting our SEO efforts to traffic growth from search. I know this is going to be tremendously hard, and this is probably one of the biggest tolls that this change is taking on SEO folks. Because as SEOs, as marketers, we've shown our value by saying, "look, we're driving up search visits, some of it's branded, some of it's unbranded, some of it's not provided—but you get a rough sense of this. And you really need that percentage: "What percent of the traffic is actually you going and getting us new visitors that never would have found us, versus branded stuff that's just sort of rising on its own." Maybe it's rising because of efforts that marketers are making: investments in content, and in social media, and in email and all these other wonderful things, but it's hard to know— it's hard to directly map that.
So here's one of the ways. Optionally, we can use AdWords to bid on branded terms and phrases. When we do that, you might want to have a relatively broad match on your branded terms and phrases so that you can see keyword volume that is branded from impression data. That gives you a sense of, "what's the trajectory, here?" If we're seeing it grow, we can identify "oh, that's not us driving a bunch of new non-branded new keyword terms and phrases; that's our brand search increasing." So we can sort of discount that, or apply that in our reporting effectively. If we see, on the other hand, that it's staying flat, but that search traffic overall is going up and to the right, then we know that's unbranded.
Optionally, if we don't want to be bidding and spending a lot of money with Google AdWords and trying to keep our impression counts high, we can use things like Google Insights or even downloading AdWords volume data estimates month-over-month to be able to track those sorts of things.
Certainly one of the things I would recommend doing even prior to this change is tracking rankings on buckets. Buckets of head terms, versus chunky middle, versus long-tail; so phrases that are getting lots of search volume, a good amount of search volume, and very little search volume. You want to have different buckets of those, so you can see, "oh hey, my rankings are generally improving in this bucket, or that bucket." Same with branded vs. non-branded; you want to be able to identify and track those separately. Then, compare against visits that you're seeing to pages that are ranking for those terms. We need to look at the pages that are receiving search traffic from those different buckets.
Again, much more challenging to do these days. But, any time we see the complexity of our practice is increasing, we also have an opportunity, because it means that those of us who are savvy, sophisticated, able to track this data, are far more useful and employable and important. Those organizations that use great marketers are going to receive outsized benefits from doing so.
C: How do I understand and analyze how searchers perceive my brand? What are they searching for that's leading them to my site? How are they searching for terms related to my brand? Again, we can bid on AdWords terms, like I talked about. You can use keyword suggestion sources like Google Suggest, Ubersuggest, certainly AdWords's own volume data, SEMRush, etc. to see the keyword expansions related to your brand or the content that's very closely tied to your brand. And internal site search data. You've got a search box up in the top-right hand corner, people are typing in stuff, and you want to see what that "XYZ" is that they're typing in. Those can help as well, and can provide you some opportunities that lead to D.
D: How do I uncover new keyword opportunities to target? Of course, there's the classic methodology that we've all employed, which is keyword research, but usually we compare that to the terms that are already sending us traffic, and we go look and say, "oh, okay, we're doing fine for these—we don't need to worry." Now, we need to take keyword research tools and add some form of rank-tracking data. That could be from Google Webmaster Tools despite its mediocrity in terms of accuracy. We can use manual rank data—we can search for it ourselves—or we can use automated data.
One of the criticisms for all rank-tracking data is always, "but there's lots of personalization and geographic localization—these kinds of things that are biasing searches—how do I see all of that?" And the answer is, well, you can't really. Personalization is going to fluctuate things. It may be sort of included in the Google Webmaster Tools data, but as Dr. Pete showed in his post, it looks a little funky right now.
For localization, you can add the geo in the string to be able to see where you rank in different geographies if you want to track those. That's something you'll be able to do in Moz Analytics and probably many of the other keyword tracking tools out there, too.
Optionally—and this is expensive, and I hate to say this is Google being evil, but this is probably what Google wants you to do when they give you "(not provided)"—which is run AdWords campaigns targeting those keywords, so that you can see new expansion opportunities. Areas where, "oh hey, we bid on this, it sent impressions, it sent some traffic, it looks like it's worthwhile, we're not ranking for it organically," and again, you can see that through your rank-tracking data or through pages receiving visits from search, and then targeting those terms.
So, a lot of this data, and a lot of these opportunities are retrievable—they're just a lot harder. I will say—this is somewhat self-promotional, but I think one of Moz's missions and obligations as a company to the search marketing world is to try and help replace, repair, and make these processes easier. So, you can guess that over the next 6-12 months that's going to be a big part of our roadmap: trying to help you folks—and all marketers—get to this data.
For now, these methodologies can and should be helpful to you, and I expect to see lots of great discussion about other ways to go about this in the comments.
Thanks, everyone—take care.
I usually don't weigh in on conversations, but I have to contribute to this one. I got into the SEO game when Alta Vista was the big search engine. We have certainly evolved from that.
Our agency is taking a little bit of a different approach. Our cheese is getting moved by Google and, whether we like it or not, we have to adjust with it. Google has gotten too big. We are all too dependent on them. Too dependent on a for-profit, publicly traded, company who has to answer to its shareholders. I'm not a hater. I understand they have to maximize profits, but I do question their stewardship of their social responsibility.
We, as marketers, are all being hired by our clients not to rank them, not to build traffic, but to help them make more money. Our clients want to give us a dollar and want two dollars in return. Its that simple. Its easy for us to forget that when we are "in the thick of thin things". Many of our clients don't care about their rankings as long as the phone rings and leads come in. Having said that, our agency is working diligently to diversify, not just online but also offline.
One of the main marketing channels we are building is Client Advocacy. We are consulting with clients to build their business from within, referrals, word of mouth, etc. We are then taking that work and using it for quality content online. For example, we recently helped a day spa win a customer service award through a social media campaign. We then took the award recognition and assured it was distributed (old school with postcards) to all of their clients. We then invited them to join us socially or visit the website for their loyalty program. We posted the award recognition on their blog and ran an online PR campaign for them, socially bookmarked it all, etc (you get the point)
The results were awesome. Client is extremely happy and we were able to diversify their marketing activities while building value in our services. Everybody wins, even Google.
I think we may be at the cusp of a fundamental paradigm shift in our industry. You ask me, I think that's exciting. As long as we all keep the conversation going and share our insight, everybody will continue to benefit. Thanks for a great post Rand.
I think traffic diversification and broader web marketing efforts are absolutely critical to the job these days. Couldn't agree more Stephan.
Rand, what is your take on this newly announced change of 100% keyword (not provided) and the prospects that organic keyword data will be provided to those who opt to pay for Google Analytics Premium?
I don't believe that Google will take that path for a number of reasons (revenue isn't that great, publicity & perception issues, going back on their stated privacy claims, etc).
Stephan, I totally agree. As I was discussing the 100% not-provided news with my fellow marketers here where I am the in-house SEO, I expressed that not only was this change inevitable (we really did know it was coming), but in some ways it's going to be good for SEO as an industry. This pretty much hammers the last nail in the coffin of link builders and content creators who did nothing but spin content based on trying to rank for keywords. Maybe now they'll actually try to write stuff that actually appeals to their real customers. As I said to our marketing director this morning, this isn't necessarily a bad thing for companies like us because we do #RCS and we actually know who our customers are. While we've had moments when we've gotten hung up on ranking or not ranking for certain terms, we didn't build our whole business around keywords, we built it around people. Maybe now some of our competitors who've continued to rank regardless of keyword stuffing the crap out of their sites will actually have to find some other way to rank in Google....or not.
The proof, as always, will be in the pudding.
I do think that running experiments in Google Adwords is a great way to conquer some of the challenges this change creates. I'd be a little worried if I wasn't already an SEO with mad Adwords skills to boot. I'd suggest to any SEO who doesn't have a good handle on Adwords management to buck up. Going forward, I see no way, particularly as an in-house SEO to know one, without knowing the other. If Wordstream were a publicly traded company, I'd be buying stock right about now.
"We, as marketers, are all being hired by our clients not to rank them, not to build traffic, but to help them make more money."
BINGO! Well said, Stephan. That's the fundamental starting point.
Its easy to understand a Client who has SEO Knowledge that conversion is the priority, not the traffic, rank, bounce rate. But the Client who has less SEO knowledge very hard to make them understood.
Agreed, Stephan. I just wrote a post the other day that addresses the issue of clients telling us they want to be #1 on Google. They see that as a goal, but it's not. Making money is the goal. We use a similar approach of getting to know the business and addressing as many parts of the big picture that we can. SEO is one part of that picture, but so is good ol' word of mouth advertising. We try to take a broad based approach so a client's marketing efforts aren't all wrapped up in one area.
Thanks, Rand, for such a great post
I fully agree with you Stephan. Any SEO'r knows that today you can't just offer SEO and have to consider conversion rates, customer retention, email marketing, social, etc etc. We had to adjust! This is probably the same reason that SEOMOZ changed to MOZ, no more just SEO. (it was fun but universal marketing is more exciting and needed)
Nicely put Stephan. It would not be a giant step from here to start charging for an Adwords Premium service whereby you pay to get your keyword data. This is what most other online services offer - a free basic tool plus a paid pro subscription.
One of the things I have appreciated most about seo over years is that it got less spammy and more logical, and transparent with a focus on quality. In way it was getting more transparent and simple. For now this latest move by Google is unnecessarily complicating life and seems like a step back in evolution of seo and search.
DAMN! I'm going to start a revolution and tell everybody to start using Bing.
While I presume you said that somewhat jokingly, I wonder what it would take to make it happen?
Bing search results are fairly similar to Google and it is for this reason that I see a search engine revolution happening. As Google becomes one big ad serving platform, users will begin to recognize that all links on a SERP are paid for by the highest bidder. It will be the users who defect because they are not receiving the best results.
Maybe the revolution is happening "organically" as I type...
Stefan Weitz (director of Bing and MozCon speaker) AND Marissa Mayer (from Yahoo) should lead our revolution!
We should start an 'Occup Robots.txt' movement ;) just get everyone to shut Google out of sites. the less big sites they can index/return the less powerful their search reults are and the more likely people are to use Bing etc. (obviously I'm saying all this light heartedly....I'm not search extremist) ;P
Personally, I think Bing results are FAR better than Google's results. I don't even bother using Google anymore.
No dear, you cant say like this. Because if you see, from past several months, Google is changing their search functionality and provided more and more accurate search result. After latest penguin update 2.1, the sites which was safe after 2.0 also flushed away. So in future, we will get more accurate result.
skype:encore.digital
I don't think there can be a mass exodus/ defection but I do believe a slow and steady time sharing of the search engines by all users will be the only way to combat this. The only way to handle a bully is to punch them in the nose(hit them in the wallet ).
Agreed, but a global campaign by SEOs to shift to Bing would be interesting
As awesome as Bing is, and becoming, how much of your/our search is coming from Bing?
12% just with Bing. Bing + Yahoo = 22%.
I looked at all 349,327 organic visits for 15 of my small business clients from Jan. 1 - Sept. 24.
Google = 81.4%
Yahoo = 9.2%
Bing = 7.7%
Combined Y/B = 16.9%
Other = 2.7%
I did not look to see how the numbers changed from month to month. It would be interesting to see how the bar graph moves over time. I am smell a Youmoz blog post in my future...
In France 95% of our trafic is coming from Google...
All my data comes from companies located in California
Relative to what Rand suggested and related to small business accts: webmaster tools is a complete waste for local or regional sites. The last data I need is Google supplying us with data for that url based on total USA traffic. Completely a waste. Of course google provides similarly worthless data in the local dashboard. It is purposefully extraordinarily limited.
The other comments have merit for smb's imho. I'm not critiquing the comment on WMT..but for a local site....seriously google I don't want to know what traffic like across the country.
OTOH: Google if you can break down the traffic volume for my region in WMT; and you can: that would be helpful.
Seriously, I would switch to Bing also. It is always not great when a society has one strong leading company that shuts everything around. I am against of monopoly, it brings the quality down and prices up!
Ok... Google added us even more hours/works... and not all the clients, especially small ones - who relied on SEO for not bleeding the revenues off in Adwords - will have the economical force to increase their already small SEO budgets... and will look to ways to obtain more organic traffic from sources likes Facebook and Social in general, being that area of Internet Marketing still offering them the opportunity to do quite good things with a not giant budget.
On the other hand... it is quite ironic that we were preaching how rankings were dead as main metric and now rankings strikes back as an help for trying to do our job.
I really don't want to have to go back to my clients and say, "remember how I told you rank was a bad metric, well now it's not as bad cause it's the best we got!" Does anyone have any other analytics software they've been using to fill in the gaps? One that doesn't cost an arm and a leg and still gives you pretty good information?
The problem isn't Google Analytics, but Google not passing the keyword information any more. Even in the arm and leg analytics platforms, I'm seeing 80-90% of no keywords being sent, or specifically listed as not provided. Analytics tools can only dig so far into a referrer. Google is shutting the keywords down at the referrer level, so the only real option is AdWords.
We're using Raven to report on search rankings to clients... it's webmaster tools data, but it works and it's super affordable.
Yeah Raven tool is amazing for us
I thought Ravens dropped rank tracking 6 months ago?
Raven Tool still tracking the ranking.
Blueprint from NinebyBlue, Vanessa Fox's old company recently acquired by RKG, has a tool that pulls GWT data and calculates extrapolated not provided keywords. But its an arm and a leg for a tool that basically takes free date from GWT and slices and dices it for analysis.
Completely agree and the challenge is now that we have some small even micro-businesses on a budget package and we may now have to go to them and say 'Sorry, you're not going to be able to afford us to do the analysis which proves where your money is going' - and that's hard because you're working to build up businesses in an affordable way. Now we have to rethink how to prove our value (beyond rankings). We can and we will, but it will take more staff hours which some of our clients may or may not be able to afford.
Yup let small businesses get hit hard with already limited budgets and now trying to do SEO with their eyes closed, well almost. Individual pages + keywords tracking can still work great. But for many Adwords might be hard.
I agree with you gfiorelli1. Google is making webmasters task harder
I think that Google misses the big picture here, as in In-house SEO I need to know what our users search for - I need that in order to ask our product department for a better product. To be honest I can't really say I understand what exactly they are trying to accomplish here.
Google started with the "not provided" about 2 years ago, I can see the first few “not provided” keywords around November 2011, but we didn't feel it really until only a year later and now we are getting closer to 100%?!
I don't know maybe it's time to start encouraging the use of other browsers?
Now to the point: I do know that many SEOs don't track 100s and 1000s of keywords, but I actually do. When I take the keywords rankings data + the most popular pages on the site, I actually still do get the big picture at where we stand. (Rand spoke about that: "Pages receiving search visits plus rank tracking data") - So for me this is the best tip for now.
As long as I can see the “Organic” separately, I can live with it!
On the day that ALL Organic traffic will be hidden under direct or “other” or anything else, then this will be a real problem!
I guess there was an inevitability one day that a Whiteboard Friday (Tuesday) was coming about this particular subject. Believe me when I say as a business we never had any plans to introduce AdWords and I have not used this service from Google in over 6 years.
About two months ago we set about a plan to gently introduce some AdWord campaigns that would allow us to determine what exact keyword searches being carried out that ultimately lead to a goal on our site being completed.
We took the approach to run a set of ads with a few ads running using [EXACT MATCH] and others using "PHRASE". Over this period we have been able to discover which keyword terms are the best and reflects the users search needs. We analysed in GA which ones showed the most goals completed, the best bounce rate and longest page views. In doing this we have treated it like a sampling exercise and with this sample data we gave the keyword phrases to our content writers with guides on how/why to use them and where to use them.
So what has been the outcome of this, well we orientated the website home page to the most successful PPC based keyword phrases and the result is that our site in the UK is now ranked No.1 in Google for that phrase and our goal completions have increased quite substantially over that period (taking into consideration the Summer holiday period of course).
Ultimately what I am saying is that we employed PPC advertising and data to support our SEO efforts. In terms of search traffic during this period new searches deemed 'PAID' only constituted less than 6% of the inbound traffic. If we had to rely on AdWords well it would blow the monthly budget out of the water.
So I guess I'm saying embrace tools such as AdWords, do your research over what ever period suits you and let it help your SEO efforts.
Also to note we don't completely rely on using PPC to orientate the site to particular phrases, organic search data is used in our decision making as well.
Best,
David
But do we not then screw ourselves as PPC behavior is going to be slightly different than standard search behavior? Or is the theory here that that isn't the case?
We've always optimized our PPC landing pages to be very... ADD. Shortest Attention Spans Possible. Intended to list nothing but the most pertinent information and a major focus on the Call to Action. Will this have homepage designs start to take queues from PPC Landing pages?
I'm not sure that is in line with Google's claim that they're trying to make the internet a better place, alternatively they're trying to make the internet go back to the "Click The Monkey For A Free iPod" days.
Though I did love throwing those bananas at that guy.
Agreed the user behaviour of the PPC visitor can be somewhat different than the organic user (any one remember the split 30% sponsored 70% organic?) and if you role the dice and base site alterations on just those visitors then I think you are going to miscalculate. Plus what do marketers tend to employ PPC for? Is it not to use it as a bigger dragnet, pull in visitors with shorter/broader terms but bigger volumes? I'd say in my experience yes and that tends to be more of a blunt instrument.
Really I'm saying my strategy is to use AdWords as a guide not a replacement because of the looming 100% (not provided). I would like to add here that the initial budget I had has now reduced as I am more confident that employing this strategy has supported and guided my SEO efforts.
Just to note the target keywords used are all 3 keyword phrases based on moderate competition and low competition, not large broad based queries.
"Believe me when I say as a business we never had any plans to introduce AdWords and I have not used this service from Google in over 6 years.
About two months ago we set about a plan to gently introduce some AdWord campaigns..."
And that right there is the one and only reason Google is doing this. I don't believe the privacy bit for one second.
Google's just thrown the world into a deep, deep chaos... Rand doing whiteboard presentations on Tuesday, Search engine land not favouring google's decisions and the NSA being general douchebags on society again.
The ramp up of not provided over the last two-three months has been substantial. I'm now seeing across various properties ranges from 60-nearly 90%, with the one exception being China, where of course Google is a much smaller provider compared to Baidu.
The most frustrating part is actually the impact on branded vs non-branded segmentation, even over the specific keyword data. At the deeper, more focused page level, I think we really can make a fair amount of assumptions about overall keyword performance, but brand segmentation absolutely relies on this visibility.
I've done a lot of educating with key stakeholders over the last 16 or so months, down-playing ranking as a reporting metric in favor of it being more of a tactical measuring tool, boosting the importance of measuring the brand/non-branded segmentation as well as URL/site section segmentation...most of which Google is attempting to unravel.
All frustrations aside, I do believe the industry will ultimately benefit from this--however I give no credit to Google for this as the industry will/is getting there regardless and having this data would still be beneficial--which is measuring the value and performance of SEO as it relates to business goals.
With or without keyword data, SEO must evolve, and I believe savvy SEOs/agencies are evolving, to measuring performance based on business metrics like sales and leads, and hopefully as attribution models continue to improve, on assisting in those areas.
Ultimately, rankings and to some extent traffic, in raw form, is an empty measure. SEO can and should drive to the top line, and those are the measures that the industry needs to raise up as the true measure of SEO, right alongside all other marketing mediums.
Now, how easy or readily available tracking and measuring SEO's impact on those areas varies wildly from site to site and business to business, so hopefully this just fuels those efforts so that getting these kinds of metrics in the future isn't such a painful process in itself.
i think if all us in seo were to champion a 3rd party open source provider... and cause ga to lose market share... perhaps we could negotiate collectively for having keyword data back... but it would take a movement unlike anything we've done in the industry. it would take the top 10 leaders to start it.....
Agreed, perhaps the most frustrating part of all of this is the fact Google is so big that it knows it can do whatever it wants and leaves us feeling so small and powerless. There are only two ways I can see Google ever giving back our organic keyword data.
First, along the lines of what you have said, maybe this latest change to 100% not provided will be the one that pushes the biggest online companies over the edge (such as Facebook, Amazon, eBay, CNN, Walmart, Target, Netflix, etc). Even if some of these sites don't even use Google Analytics, they are certainly using some kind of enterprise level analytics software in which they are forking over millions of dollars for but now they won't get any organic keyword data from Google either. So they could organize together and threaten to stop using all Google products, especially Google AdWords which would hit Google where it hurts them the most. However, since these companies are so heavily reliant on Google traffic (both organic and PPC), it's a fine line to tread because Google could simply "tweak" their algorithm to make their sites drop in the rankings and organic traffic would tank. But it definitely could work if enough huge companies banded together.
Second, if there is no serious pushback coming from the huge companies listed above, then unfortunately the only option left would be some kind of class action lawsuit or government intervention. I'm not sure yet what the grounds would be, but as Google continues to swell in size and make any moves as they see fit (especially ones that are obvious attempts to push more people to use AdWords or increasingly dedicate more pixels to promote their own products in the SERPs), then there's bound to be lawyers and/or government agencies who are chomping at the bit to bring the hammer down for monopolistic behavior.
It's just a matter of time before Google pulls out all the free data they currently give to webmasters and make it accessible through Adwords exclusively.
Unfortunately I think you are exactly right.
I also would not be surprised if Google eventually makes keyword data available for Google Analytics Premium users, which is only a cool $150,000 a year. However, that may be seen as anti-competitive behavior so perhaps it legally could never happen. But we all know Google would definitely do so if they could get away with it.
except that in order to provide that data, the query would have to be in the referral string, and if the keyword is in the referral string that you could get it using a custom variable or a different analytics tool.
Not necessarily. Google could simply encrypt the search query in the referral string which could only then be unencrypted by Google Analytics Premium. Much like the gclid parameter in AdWords.
BINGO! Has anyone thought about this angle yet. IT'S ABOUT MONEY! Always is..... They aren't going to take it away forever.... you'll just have to start PAYING FOR IT.... Special clearance for the special data....
SPECIAL = $$$$
I don't often get chance to reply to Moz posts these days, being snowed under with projects. But I did want to say thanks to Rand and his enormous team for the job they do. The Internet Marketing Industry is a turbulent and ever-changing one and that makes things hard.
What is great is that you are able to give us some guidance on a) what we can do now and b) what Moz will be spending some R&D doing.
We have a lot to consider on our Internet Marketing packages and now what price we cannot feasibly offer SEO below due to the work involved in processing data in order to be fully accountable to our clients. This move by Google presents genuine business challenges not just to marketers but for your every-day website owner who just wants to make the most of their website as a good solid lead/sales tools. Lots to consider and plenty to mull over.
Time to bury my head in code and redress this after a pub dinner!
Google is just a mean kid with a magnifying glass..
Thanks for the info, Rand. One question this brings to mind for the community, if Google isn't tracking keyword referrals in our Analytics for (not provided) because the searcher is logged into their account, then does the Keyword Planner data remain accurate. If they aren't tracking in our Analytics to "protect users privacy" and not showing us what brought people to our websites or a client's website, then does their keyword tool remain reliable? It would seem contradictory to not show us, yet still track the searches and their respective monthly volume. Anybody have any thoughts on this? Just curious now after listening/watching the Whiteboard Tuesday.
We can’t comment on accuracy of Keyword planner as of now. But it should be right if Google not planning to change its business model.
I had the exact same question. I thought maybe we would now stop getting monthly keyword search volume data altogether. Surely Google wouldn't release the new Keyword Planner tool just before they knew they were about to make the switch to secure search if said switch would make the tool (or major parts of it) useless.
I was wondering the exact same thing. I find it curious that most articles don't discuss this point specifically - other than saying that if you buy an AdWords campaign, you will have data on the keywords used for the clicks you bought. While I feel the loss of data with respect to the keywords that drove organic traffic to my clients' sites, and its impact on showing what percentage of organic traffic is unbranded (for instance), I think that losing overall data on search volumes by keyword is far more off-putting. (So many of our mandates hinge on in-depth keyword exploration, discovery and selection!) It is true that the keyword Google analytics data gives insight on untapped opportunities. But to even MAKE it to our own organic analytics, those keywords have to be somewhat "tapped". (That is, people had to be able to find us when searching for those keywords.) The true untapped keyword opportunities are the ones that people are searching for and for which we are NOT appearing. So far, we have been able to find these in the Keyword Tool/Planner. Whether or not we retain free access to this data makes a big difference to how destabilizing this news is.
Looks like we will have to build models mapping pages to KW rankings and organic traffic. Likely end up making 'better' pages.
It's a shame that there's so much negativity going on here... Yip, it's gonna be tough, but we know that Google isn't there to tell us what to do or how to achieve good rankings anyway. So what's changed...?
Okay, they've pulled the rug from under our feet again! As well as making things difficult for website owners to get ranked by rolling out animalistic algorithmic updates here, there and everywhere, they've removed the Google Adwords Keyword Tool which makes it more difficult for the average SEO to work out which keywords have the higher volumes of search, they've gone for the jugular with SEO's across the board by implementing (not provided) and increasing these results to almost 100%.
But hey, it's not all bad! We've had the pleasure of a Whiteboard Tuesday from the legend who is Rand Fishkin which quite frankly has made my day. AND, we have great things to look forward to as Team MOZ are going to come up with fantastically wonderful tools and advice that will see us ride this wave.
It all goes back to the basics of SEO really. We constantly learn and adapt and evolve in order to stay current. I see this as a great opportunity to do all of these things and to grow.
Another point to think about and positive to take away from all of this... How often do you come across a website owner who has read one article about SEO from 2003/4/5/6/7/8 etc. and they automatically think that they know all there is to know about the subject? They jump onto the Google Adwords Keyword Tool, log into Google Analytics / Webmaster Tools and all of a sudden they're suitably qualified to tell us how it all works! Surely the recent behaviour of Google can be seen as the beginning of the end of these "know all" clients and surely, that will add more value to the roles that we perform?!?! OR, perhaps I'm just being too positive overall today (personally, I blame the 12 cups of coffee I've had).
I'd love to hear your views and comments on this, so please feel free to pick up on any of my points of view.
David, I totally agree with you!
You missed a big alternative, in my opinion. Bing. Depending on your business, Bing data may be similar to what Google's not providing, so it could be considered representative. If you have a major site with good traffic, a Bing slice, especially with all the other data sources he mentions, could give meaning.
Also, as FYI it looks like Google made the change yesterday to use only secure based search for even non-signed in searches which means webmasters will now receive zero keyword data.
More info here & you can test it yourself by signing out of your Google account, doing a search, and seeing that it's secure. https://searchenginewatch.com/article/2296351/Goodbye-Keyword-Data-Google-Moves-Entirely-to-Secure-Search
Bye bye search data...
I remember once upon a time when the US Government tried to exercise its power with SOPA and PIPA. Some of the largest content publishers on the web responded with a resounding rejection of such an effort. Some sites committed to "black out" in protest. And it worked. Do you think there's any chance in getting a similar reaction from large and highly valuable publishers who are consistently found in Google to block Googlebot from crawling their sites in protest? If it happened...If Wikipedia and every national news source suddenly stopped allowing Google to crawl their pages, would Google reconsider? What if they all cloaked a page that showed users referred by Google a protest page, with instructions to use Bing or Yahoo instead. That might get a response, right?
It is not a crawling blackout that will force change... it is advertising blackout for a day/week.
The International Ad Dollars "NOT PROVIDED" Day/Week.
Good WBF (or WBT, as it were!), Rand & co.
Hope you don't mind if I ask a question not about the WB topic but about the making of the WB video... Given that the 100% not provided news only came out yesterday, you guys got this out very quickly! Was it a case of dropping everything to make the video, or had you pre-recorded at a previous time in order to get it out there quickly? Just curious to know - either way, very Agile! :-)
It was on the calendar to film a WB Friday yesterday (as I'm traveling this week), so it just worked out. We have done some more "emergency" filmings in the past to cover an important and timely topic, but this one was a lucky break :-)
Yea great work even taking the time to scratch out Friday to Tuesday in the video shows your effort, and attention to detail! Great work Rand and Team!!
A lot of interesting stuff, but now let's start talking about what Rand asked us:
"I expect to see lots of great discussion about other ways to go about this in the comments"
Now, how can I find related keywords that users search to reach my website?
1) Rand said -> keyword suggestion sources like Google Suggest, Ubersuggest, certainly AdWords's own volume data, SEMRush, etc.
2) Google's Autocomplete + the Alphabet -> In Google start typing a popular keyword for which your website is already ranking (rank tracker) and the letter a following that keyword. Google will suggest another keyword. Select it then type a after this one as well. Then b, then c until you pull out all the long queries related to your product or brand.
This method is way better than looking at search data in Analytics - where you could see only what already worked for your site. With Autocomplete you will get new ideas, new approaches, popular question, even negative keywords for Adwords.
With this change we did not loose anything in terms of suggestions, ideas, and what works or not. We just lost the ability to present the results of our work in a very concrete way (by keywords that brought traffic). Let's rely more on conversions. With conversion tracking you can prove the boss you brought more happy users! And this works well with "not provided"!
Well then! that is one HUGE Spanner in the Works (or wrench for the Americans on here)... thanks for the video Rand.
We currently do run adwords for Brand Search and I hate to say it, but I can see us becoming more and more reliant on paid Ads to drive qualified traffic to our websites. The next few months are going to be particularly difficult until the dust hopefully settles and new methods are introduced to somehow find the keyword organic data we require to evaluate the content of our site.
I am glad I am a paid member of the Moz community as I think many of us are going to need your knowledge, analytics software and marketing prowess to move forward.
Hopefully monitoring Bings data more closley will also help to fill in some volume and keyword metrics.
Shame Bing is so useless outside of the USA.
Too true :(
Sad but true. Search volumes for Bing in the UK are much lower - therefore CTR's lower still. Makes Bing's data much less actionable at this stage.
bing is not so effective for webmasters. It is just a dummy
I'd like to see Apple make Bing their default search engine in their next update. That would give Google shareholders something to chew on.
in IOS 7 Siri now uses Bing for web searches instead of Google. It's a small step...
Ah! I thought I was the only insane person seeing my (not provided) go through the roof.
Is there a truly legitimate excuse that Google provides for this tactic? Security and privacy simply don't seem like a very good reason.
My hypothesis is that Google will begin to release this data in the near future for a price.
Think about. You go to Costco and get hooked on that delicious cut of meat or those yummy soft licorices from Australia. Once you are habitually addicted, the price slowly creeps up another 20% until you are paying astronomical prices for a relatively mediocre experience when compared to the value ratio.
Why wouldn't Google do the same? Get you legally addicted on an incredible aspect of Google Analytics, slowly remove that feature and then charge a very generous $0.01 /100 keyword queries. With billions of keywords being requested, they have just pocketed another billion per year. No biggie.
I cannot (nor will not) confirm any of these mere conjectures... but if I happen to be correct, then we can all cry a little tear together. That is, unless someone can give me a really (really!) good reason for such lewd behavior.
Thanks Rand. Do you think Google will ever face any Anti-Trust lawsuits because of this kind of behavior or does anyone care? Google's contempt for SEOs is clear. I watched Maile Ohye, from Google, attack one of the presenters from a SEO software firm at SMX East last year. She went after him because his company's software was allegedly "violating" Google's Terms of Service. Maile's attack sent a cold child through that room. I am not surprised. I think we need to start thinking about putting less eggs in the Google basket. Thanks again for focusing on a solution Rand. We really appreciate your hard work and advice here.
Alas, this is the messy sequel to peak Open.
Moving on...sites with site search focused design and less traditional navigation now seem like a more interesting idea.
I'm thinking design like gov.uk which feature the internal search box heavily - you can then mine that data in analytics for user intent. To date I've found the site search % has been low and not as rising as I would hope for, but that's largely a result of it being a less prominent CTA in an old design. With modern design now there's definitely an appeal with this approach.
If you have a site search and want an Analytics segment to install to your GA dashboard to monitor that %, here's a link.
Personally, I don't think this is a surprise to anyone, it just hurts when it finally happens. Like a bad relationship.
Unfortunately, like other comments, this does make rank tracking more important, but even more important are the methods and technology which this will drive. This is a huge opportunity for companies (whether from Moz or otherwise) to develop new tools using analytics, adwords data, webmaster tools data, and (in my eyes the largest untapped resource) site-specific click curves. Check out this post for some of my thoughts on this opportunity and how to estimate it. This fallback method is to find a click curve applicable to your site, get accurate ranking data, and calculate the likely share of search volumes it earns.
Be happy, as this is an opportunity to get more creative and adapt!
Is it safe to say that SEO (as we have known it) is dead? Other aspects of Internet Marketing are going to pick up. PPC/Social/Offline/Mobile/Local marketing are all going to be more important and requite a holistic approach to marketing campaigns.
Rand,
You make a good argument for marketers but I think the evil of spammers our weights the good of marketers, in Google's eyes. Time to adapt...
"It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is the most adaptable to change. "
~ Charles Darwin
Thank you, Rand, for the helpful video. In my opinion, Google has become a monopoly; it may be time to turn to Bing as much as possible. While I may have to rely on Google for some data, I wonder if Bing can replace some of this information?
Another thought to consider is the ultimate customer: the customer who is searching. Over the past few months, I have heard a steady stream of comments about the search results in Google. Many people have noticed that their results are not helpful, and they are frustrated. Most don't realize they are clicking on paid ads. Maybe Google has just out-Googled itself.
Now I hate Google!
If keyword tracking is akin to A/B testing then could we look at a MV approach mapping page level meta data to traffic/conversions -- perhaps using Bing/Yahoo sample as a control? PS If this is a stupid idea please forgive me - I am not an SEO.
As the use of a secure internet connection continues to rise, organic keyword data from search engines becomes less and less useful to publishers. Each time a visitor uses a search engine to arrive at your website, the keyword they used to find your site is captured and referred to the analytics platform you use to analyse your web traffic. These keywords offer valuable information to the website owner about how people found the site and gives insights into relevant content that the owner could be creating.
Google says the removal of the keyword in the referrer data was purely to protect the privacy of a user, by curtailing the ability of a third party being able to ‘eavesdrop’ on what the user typed into the search engine. However when it comes to paid ads on the Google network, Google still refers every keyword from ad clicks whether the user is signed in or not.
Whatever reasons you may believe lie behind this move from Google, other internet browsers have recognized the need for added security for their users. In July 2012, Firefox 14 launched with SSL search as default meaning that all organic keyword searches are encrypted while referring keywords are still passed to advertisers. At the start of 2013, Chrome introduced SSL as default for users searching using the browser. More recently, web users using iOS6 to search on Safari were wrongly attributed in analytic platforms as “direct” traffic. In July 2013, Safari amended its secure search model so that users are correctly attributed as organic “(not provided)” traffic. Current estimations are that (not provided) accounts from approximately up to 73% of all organic keyword traffic.
The introduction of (not provided) traffic has increased the awareness around keyword report data and has created a drive to find effective new solutions. Analysing the landing pages of (not provided) traffic can offer insights into what the user may have searched for in terms of what content is offered on the landing page.
Google is also helping publishers find alternative keyword data. In August 2013 Google launched a new Paid & Organic report in Adwords that offers insights into keyword performance when ads are shown or not shown making it easier to analyse how paid and organic work side by side. Google Webmaster Tools is another useful tool which shows impression data, ranking and click through rates for the top terms being used to find your website.
This was long coming, don't think it is a bad thing we just need to adjust. Here is something I wrote just a few days ago https://info.roojoom.com/2013/09/24/google-killing-seo-is-this-a-bad-thing/
IMO there should be some kind of court case about this. They take the data, use it yet dont let others use it - even tho they use others data. If enough people/big companies didnt let them browse websites or some coutnries .gov then i wonder what they would do.
Currently we wont have data that the + NSA has [yes dont be stupi to think they bliocked it form NSA or PRISM ;)]
Brands of all sizes should stand up to Google.
It is time to #BoycottAdwords
https://twitter.com/BenAcheson/status/382432178224652288
Initially I was a little concerned about the increase in Not Provided, and I know that communication and reporting to some clients will still prose problems. However, I'm now really looking forward to solving the issue and finding an elegant solution to show value and improvement.
Well the free market usually wins. Bing will just get stronger and hopefully some new analytic companies come along and replace them. Google is out of control as far as I'm concerned. They need to focus on a few things and do them well instead of branching off in every direction, and then constinatly changing the things that made them popular.
I cannot stand the fact that Google is removing all organic keyword data under the guise of "protecting our users' privacy" while still providing full keyword referral data to AdWords customers. If they really cared about the privacy of their users, they would not provide this data to AdWords customers. It's a pure money grab that has nothing to do with user privacy. Simple as that.
It would be great to see what tools you build to help solve these problems.
I know my office has already started automating the "joining of data" from Google Webmaster Tools, Rank Tracking and Landing Page Visitor tracking." I'm sure Moz's solutions will be a lot prettier than ours :) but I encourage all marketers to come up with tools to overcome this update.
On a positive note, this will make the SEO skill set more valuable. Everyone hang in there.
Hi Bryant-Jaquez,
Great to see there's folk taking action to stay as informed as possible. I hope that it all comes together for you and your team!
I posted a comment a couple of days ago which also made the point that in the long run, good SEOs will be rewarded by this for their hard work and expanding skill-set. All those website owners who have been self proclaimed SEOs over the years won't know how to react or where to turn. So inevitably, they will need to turn to us... Well, I hope this is the case ha ha!
Trying to divorce our website from Google. Hopefully by the end of 2014 we will be completely void of any Google Product! I have a small business website in a niche market that is already hard to high with specific keywords. Now we have no keywords and the problem now is how do we continue to find competitive keywords. I paid for Google Adwords and it cost of us more in the long run, especially after running All of the cost data. In the end per sale we lost $$$! I run everything down to ordering from the manufacturer to the Adwords campaigns to managing Google Analytic, so when all of the numbers came out for Google Adwords, it was disappointing......
Our Adwords campaigns were highly specific used phrase & exact matches, the merchant feed center, and even did the advance areas such as dynamic Adwords and the Re-marketing Campaigns. I complained and they told me I was not running Optimizing my campaigns properly to get conversions. So not true! The cost per click for Adwords can be anywhere from 30 cents to five dollars per click with no conversion! Who can afford $5 per click for one keyword? Now times that by 30-40 campaigns with 100-500 keywords campaign. More money for Google.
I have decided to take a lot of focus off of what Google can do for me and now look at it as what I can do for Google. We plan to leave behind the analytics code by the end of this year.... We will see how things go for 2014. The other problem I have with Google is that with the CPC method, you never know who or what is actually clicking on a link.
Interesting discussion. Let's take it up a notch.
Theoretically, webmasters have ultimate control.
It's called the REP, the robots exclusion protocol, and there is a very simple move to make:
User-agent: Google
Disallow: /
Bear with me here...
Hypothetically, if enough, especially if enough of the "big" players, all implemented either a robots.txt disallow, or even better, page disallows on Google, how interesting things would become.
While REP isn't something that anyone must adhere to, Google has acknowledged doing so. Google has always claimed their desire to deliver the best user experience. What happens to Google's SERPs and the user experience if (a very big if) this was carried out?
Google is left either having to revoke their "not provided" action or blatantly ignoring direct requests from webmasters and crawling their websites anyway...all in the name of the searcher of course.
Okay, so the reality of game theory and human nature kicks in here...webmasters agree to disallow, but then don't, or quickly undue it with the hope of securing rankings in the absence of all the sites that have now disallowed.
Anyway, interesting knowing "we" potentially hold the cards, just maybe aren't willing to play the hand.
I was considering that move. But right now about 45% of our traffic comes from Google. Such as same that bing, yahoo, and aol are so hard. The other problem is that a lot of search engines use Google's search engine data for their own searches!
Does Google use out site logs? cant we stop them from getting access? I thought I heard in the audio book "In the plex" that they where important?
plus has it not been that when your signed in that its encrypted and that it might have something to do with all that NSA business? lets not forget that they cant tell us if it is or not. we are looking from it from a marketing view but if its all search then the data would not be of use to spooks?
Always very insightful, thanks Rand!
Sorry if this is in the other 93 comments :) but...
A thought;
What if there was a widget or small snippet of code, that allowed you to essentially poll your visitors for a (all) specific page and say, 3 keywords/terms?
Make it of value to the user: visitor lands on the page, a small passive content section that says something like;
"What are you hear to find out about? KW1, KW2, KW3". Real feedback from your actual customers. Possibly adding in an open field or adding to site search, etc. Could be worded many different ways to suit the audience.
VOC is as real as it gets, whether we like it or not :).
Misc;
I work for an agency and it would be a "hard sell" to add in all the additional ad groups (overhead) to test impressions on brand terms. Although I think it is of some value.
Site search: I advocate this often, but with the additional lens of each attribution channel (organic or otherwise). This helps "weed" out terms and lets you see some specificity.
My positive spin. I never rely on one channel to tell me the whole picture anyways and in someways this is allowing (forcing) me to spend more time in other tools providing a more rounded picture.
Thanks again, Jonathan
Definitely frustrating to see such a high volume of (not provided) referrers in GA. Great tips for exploring different ways to see some of this data. None as good as having the data show in GA, but data to use nonetheless for estimating.
Looking at the landing page where people arrive from search engine should be quite good to understand which keyword users search for. You don't have the exact query but if they land on your page /used-cars-boston and no one lands on /used-car-new-york then you'll probably have to tune the New York page...
While I agree with your position here and I'm seeing it repeated by a lot of marketers, I wonder how to make this actionable for future research. In other words, how am I supposed to use this for pages/keywords that do not yet exist? If I want to create great content around used cars but am not sure where people are looking for them, are you truly suggesting I create a page for every city/local area and wait a few months to check Analytics and see which page is performing best?
This seems like a silly way to plug a hole to me and I don't quite understand what people are getting at. It kind of feels like people are suggesting I think of every possible keyword combination and create pages optimized for each... That's chaos.
Well... creating a page for each possible keywords is definitely not a strategy :)
Checking the landing pages from search engine traffic is good for existing pages.
To find out more keywords there is still the AdWords tool, Google Trends and even the Webmaster tools should help.
If you need to create content for new keywords then is more a keyword research then a current site optimisation and you'll use the external tools mentioned above... does it make sense?
I think this will make us think, and act a little more outside the box (essentially, problem solve). We will be getting 'not provided' for SEO, but still get keyword data for SEM. While we can't all afford total SEM to get this data, thinking more around social media (where you can do campaign attribution, for free, if you have an engaged audience) will allow for organic measurements, by means of real people referrals (kinda what link based SEO started as). In addition, I think this position from Google will make more sites do their own internal keyword analysis by means of AB testing. On site, test out which messaging and keywords work best, and then use a continual cycle of AB testing to help provide that data. Doing this will actually help SERPs, cause you're understanding the visitor better, and they will be less likely to bounce. Last thought for the day is to provide in-site search, where we get our own data for search terms - a potential pain, but still, a means to obtain data. Yeah, things will still come from Bing, but I don't see this has being a reliable source for ever. In fact, I see a time not too far away where HTTPS is the norm, and we don't even get site referrals (which could help for site personalisation).
@Tejas
other tracking tools like piwik or etracker in this case are also useless because they don't get referer information from google
@burner
you are right, piwik and etracker both are don't get referer information from google.
Oh Google, when you became a bad guy? Seriously, 'removing' keywords from analytics it's like shooting on his own foot. I hope Google takes consideration about the SEO, Marketers, Webmasters and others who prefere other tools and not buy their Keywords and run campains in the months to come in response for such as stupid decision.
Wow, I thought Google would have carried this out farther on down the road....
I spoke with a couple of clients today about Google going dark on keyword data - they both said on the lines of
"... so we'll all just have to learn how to look differently at the data we do get then... "
Not worth losing sleep over?
Its a case then of educating our clients that there is data that's there, we just have to learn how to interpret it without keywords (until Google decides to charge for organic keyword data which seeing as we live in a Data Age wouldn't come as any great surprise).
Measuring organic brand searches was a useful metric for my team and clients which is one I really didn't want to lose (even if there is some way of measuring via Adwords/GWT it's not going to be the same). We already use Adwords for some campaigns as a testing ground for keyword research, impression rates and clicks before deploying phrases organically so that won't drastically change our approach.
Still it makes you seriously wonder what Google will do next...
We can still use data from Bing however, correct? If so, that should help along the process and juxtapose that data over to Google. Not perfect, but you get the drift.
When Bing represents the 1% of the Search volume in a country (as it is in Italy or Spain), the extrapolation are very very unreliable.
I am really curious why is this so? Is Bing in US significantly higher then the rest of the world? Granted that it is already pretty low compared to Google in US too.
Thanks for the vid, really intrigued by the prospect of bidding on terms in Adwords. As useful as this is, I do find myself wondering whether the effort involved is necessarily worth the payoff (my taskload at work is pretty busy, as I'm sure everyone's is) - do you think this is essential, no matter the effort, or more of a "you know, you really ought to if you can" style situation?
Love your analytics software and will be really interested in how you guys attempt to fill this hole.
Thanks!
Rand- thanks for the TAGFEE.
T. teaching A. about G. google F. for E. everyone's E. education
Removing all keyword data is not just a hit on webmasters and publishers, its a hit on every entity across the globe with a website. Its a hit against every entity with a financial stake in its presence on the web from the largest companies to small shops and non-profits. And of course its a hit by a monopoly. They have all the information. We have none.
Its interesting. Google has been litigating to protect its right to access GMAIL so they can send ads there. Boy is that an invasion of privacy, far more serious than knocking out keywords.
Great Video - I think the fundamental shift by Google employing not provided will mean us SEO's needing to become more of a T-shaped digital marketer - employing a diverse range of digital skills to help demonstrate our benefit to an organisation/clients.
So much to absorb and Google does what Google does to thwart us all so we buy ADS!
There are another alternatives to try to measure the traffic coming from, apart form Google Analytic and Google Webmaster Tools.
Such as
https://clicky.com/
https://www.gosquared.com/
https://www.kissmetrics.com
Here at teksyte we use the last one
Hi,
Since September 23rd I can no longer see any search queries in GWT/Search Engine Optimizion report in Analytics. Are you experiencing the same thing?
I been conducting my experiments as well on this matter, using simple and basic tools like
Google Analytics (Real-Time Overview)
Different browsers like, firefox, internet explorer, chrome, maxthon, opera, safari, canary
I also use VPN to find the cause of this.
I do a search using a keyword related to a website with administrador role in Google analytics
The result shows that the query is shown only when is coming from Safari.
The rest of the browsers this days are showing (not provided) using Google Analytics (Real-Time Overview) to measure the traffic.
this is a simple test using simple tools to try to understand a little more Rand Fishkin start here
Thank you, Rand, for this VERY helpful piece on the troublesome "not provided" issue. Not only have you explained the problem very well, these tips and ideas are a great help in helping me to figure out how to move forward from this point, especially as it relates to helping my clients to get past this issue and find more clarity in their own SEO strategies.
Thanks rand really useful post.
In fact yesterday while I was analyzing you can guess what I saw...100% not provided! For the first time and I was really shocked but I was kinda expecting it becuase since august the not provided % was going higher and higher.
Should we also focus and invest on machines like Bing like now or its gonna be a waste of time?
The issue is not the analytics tool (of Google). The data from Google (keywords data) is not send (at all).
<Sorry i have reply on the wrong comment>
No its ok, thanks for the correction!!
Honestly, Whiteboard Tuesday was a bit more shocking than Google making the push to 100%. I am defiantly sad to see Google commit to this move but so much of the data was already (not provided) I feel like we have already needed to tap into many of the other tactics mentioned in the video. As always, many thanks to Rand for offering your insight on the matter.
Yes Ofyo @Organik we need to search out the new techniques to work on.
as it is old proverb "when there's no GOOD way out... then there's a GOD way out :) "
This is such a headache for everyone, especially for small businesses who don't have the budget for a full time SEO team. Such a pain! I don't understand why Google implemented such a policy.
Reading translation again after 2 month of published. very detail explained Rand Sir.
Ummm, isn't it easier to use Piwik or Shinystats for website tracking, instead of Google Analytics? If in a future I will be using a useless script on my website's pages, I rather swith to another website tracking...
If Google starts loosing all the data from Analytics, maybe they will change their mind.
Though, a lot of people needs to quit using Google Analytics
Fantastic stuff.
Consider this recent scenario: I am currently in a situation where a client's traffic dropped dramatically. By drilling down into the keywords we found that specific terms had significant drops. We subsequently found a competitor had modified / optimized their site and was coming up on the top of the SERP for these key terms and most likely cutting into my clients traffic. Now we're in the process of making changes to recover that traffic.
It's sending a shiver up my spine to think I could not do this again! I could have identified this without the keywords, but I'm not sure I would have--it certainly wouldn't have been that easy--but could have been done using page views and other means (explained by Rand) if that's all I had, I suppose. Thoughts? Would this be a case of being too focused on the keywords and competition and not on the "next generation" of SEO?
Thanks Rand. This is really a helpful post.
What i believe is that after few months or a year people searching for this market switch from google. Because GOOGLE results are now much more towards content.
Google is just promoting and trying to switch users towards adwords.
Wow this was a definite eye opener for me with google, though as it has been pointed out before I am barely getting any traffic from Bing searches
I'd have to add that Bing and Yahoo data accounts for roughly 20% of search. Luckily, we still have 20% of our keyword data that can be analyzed. However, if they were to add encryption, then who know what would happen..
Just 1 Single word
Wow......
Hey everyone, as a heads up- All of my (Not Provided) data has shown up in an account that is linked to adwords. My blogs that aren't linked still show (not provided). Also, All of the data under the SEO tab in analytics is back. Too much to post here. I wrote about it on my blog with as much detail as I have at this time. will update as I learn more.
https://copyandcontentwriter.com/blog/google-keyword-data-back/
If i am not using google Adwords how to improve traffic from searches....
My biggest frustration with the (not provided) data for organic search traffic is reporting keywords driving traffic and how the traffic is converting. Without that data it becomes really hard to show upper management that an SEO strategy is working and revenue is increasing from the work that we are providing through our SEO campaign.
I guess my two best options now are to bid on the keywords in AdWords and assume that the keyword is going to convert as well in the organic search results, or, use Bing data and assume that conversion data will be similar in Google.
Hi All,
the (not provided) kws in my analytics report count as 99% of all organic queries coming from Google. I run some test and I noticed that in Italy all the organic queries are reported as (not provided).
What I did is:
- log out from google
- cleaning cash and cookies form the browsers (Firefox and IE10)
- activated an httpwatch, filtered by the keyword "analytics" and read all the parameters that Google analytics sent. I could read clearly that the search query is (not provided). Here below you can see the last part of the string sent from GA script.
utmz%3D10918252.1381310513.1.1.utmcsr%3Dgoogle%7Cutmccn%3D(organic)%7Cutmcmd%3Dorganic%7Cutmctr%3D(not%2520provided)%3B&utmu=q~
In fact I noticed that even if you are not logged in, the Google HP is on an https page. So I assume that starting form September all the Organic queries coming from Google are protected.
Did you notice the same?
that helped a lot - thx 4 that. Work to do in next month ... ooomph!
Hey Rand Fishkin,
I am shock to read your post thanks for sharing your thought and analysis with us. But i think some time Google is better performing any other search engine. They give better result from the keywords search yes it's not permanent stable. They increase and decrease the position of the website according to our working.It is difficult to understanding the main strategy of Google in which they work.
And thanks to aware from this by this valuable post.
Great insight again Rand.Its simple, just do not look to deep. Google's tweaks have always been to improve user experience except lately they have made much more progress due to the over-dependence granted by us. Should we trust Google? We should trust that they will eliminate any gaming or shortcut technique we knew in the past. Stop! Take a deep breath and re-focus all of your energy into delighting your customers. Analytics will return to us it will just be in a different form sorta intertwined with adwords in a purchasable structure. And yes you will have to pay! Do you think Google is going to throw these stats out like an expired sandwich? Guess again these stats that we had for free for so many years are not gone forever, they just will not be free ever again. Until then a good inbound strategy should be in the mists or already in action. And remember engage, wetheir its in person, social, pr's, blogs or your website realize who your ideal buyer is a engage them, delight them, connect personally with them and along with rest of us its will bare fruit. This is a radical time in search yet all the answers have all been given, time to apply them.
Nothing mentioned about anything other than traffic data. What about e-commerce sites that currently rely on keyword data to attribute monetary value being driven from individual keywords & groups? You can't get this data through work-arounds...
Great WBF, Rand! And very timely. One of the first things you discussed really resonated with me - The fact that marketers aren't using this data to do evil things (at least, hopefully they're not!); they're using keyword data to make the web a better place. They're using the keyword data to improve the user's experience and to help the user to find what they're looking for. And hasn't that been Google's goal all along? From their site: "Google’s mission is to organize the world’s information and make it universally accessible and useful." How can a webmaster make their information "useful" if they don't know what searchers want to use it for?
I might be biased because I'm a marketer and an avid internet user, but I don't see how (not provided) is a privacy issue. It doesn't bother me that sites I visit might know the query that lead me there. They're not tying it to me specifically; they just know that someone searched for it. In a sense, the users willingly gave that query up when they typed it into the search bar. I'm not aware of any laws that protect that (please let me know if I'm wrong). Has Google given any examples of situations where an individual's privacy was violated? https://xkcd.com/1269/ I think I agree with the nihilist in this situation. ;-)
To try to find a silver lining to this situation, I think it will encourage companies to align their SEO and PPC work and to have those teams work closely, seeing as they'll need to share the AdWords search query data.
Overall great and helpful comments at an early stage to start the conversations going about how to deal with this enormous sea change.
I tend to always look at local sites. I have two references to the comments above. I think there will need to be other types of work arounds to this change by google.
I referenced this above: Google Webmaster Tools is amazingly UNFUNCTIONAL and unhelpful for a local site. It doesn't break down keywords on a local basis. The most granular or smallest locational information it gives you is at a national level. That is of no assistance.
On that basis one might hope that the dashboard for a local business inside google+ local might help. Not much value there IMHO. Lots of misinformation and/or a purposeful effort by google to limit and give less than helpful or transparent info:
A. You don't know the radius around an smb that generates clicks and impressions. Is it 1 mile, five miles a huge region, your town, the city??? You just don't know. Google won't tell you either.
B. They truncate or cut off keywords by geo area. No help at all.
C. They limit keywords to the top 10. If you have some totally irrelevant categories showing up....wham you get even less valuable information.
D. Over time the Places/Maps/Google+ dashboard has generated some very irrelevant and unreliable data.
So: No help there vis a vis a weakness via WMT.
2nd big issue which I think needs to be addressed differently than suggested above by Rand in that it plays out differently for smb sites:
Very often the first page of an smb site will show up first and highest for a GREAT Many types of phrases. That is a function of the PAC or Maps and that small bus sites end up having the first page show highest for a great variety of keywords.
I think the bundling of keywords against a page is a great idea. I just don't see it playing out well for local sites because of the PAC and the way the first page often dominates in Serps.
but otherwise its an excellent and thoughtful package of comments at an early stage dealing with a big set of problems.
Great and timely vid Rand/Moz Team!
Some great posts above - I have a suggestion, along lines of diversification of channels, determining efficacy of kw's for use in on-page content and image/creative testing for pages.
As marketing director for a larger concern, which includes multiple companies that heavily employ PPC, I enjoy rich access to kw data in Adwords (Google and Bing) so we already gleen a great deal form PPC in ways simialr to the suggestions Rand lays out clearly in the WBF (Tuesday). However, we have been, to some degree, over-leveraged to PPC so I began exploring other channels earlier this year.
A friend of mine works over at FutureAds and they have a contextual keyword banner campaign called In-Text Ads (CPC display banner served upon hover over of selected words in text of any site, but you only pay for clicks so it offers a free impression if no click occurs) and Targeted Interstitials program (new browser window presents your landing page, in CPV model). Both are forms of display advertising but are only triggered by keywords entered in search engines, or in the case of the Interstitials campaign, upon entry of competitor url's into the address bar/search engine bar.
Now I recommend this service overall if you intend on dabbling in the world of targeted display, or if you just want an alternative to testing in Adwords bc perhaps you're in a space with highly competitive/costly keyword terms. However, it may not be sutied for all here (in-house vs agency SEO's). The display banners or browser windows only serve to those users who have downloaded the TrafficVance browser add-on- according to FutureAds that is about 24 million people.
This tool is allowing us to target keywords and test responses not only on a keyword level but also test creative/ad copy variations which we are using to inlfuence our on-site content of the respective landing pages. We are discovering new keyword opportunities this way, at much lower cost levels than the cpc cost in Adwords.
Again, I know this is a tool not suited for all needs/readers, but it's a decent audiance size, provides keyword and creative testing opportunities, and can serve as a stepping stone for those lookign to diversify away from SEO and PPC alone.
Hope this was helpful.
Great video, thanks for continually helping the community. I love our community, always good insights from new people. I'm new to the moz blog, but not new to moz. Videos like this help cope with keeping up. Not much of a direct comment, but after I watched the video it just got me all nostalgic for some reason. I know we've all done our share of learn by trial and error, but quality insight like this certainly helps. In return, because i never share back, if anyone would like some copy on explaining seo 101 for people who are stuck on being hopeless DIYs I've got an informal article that I posted on my blog ages ago called to seo is not to https://federalinternetmarketing.com/to-seo-is-not-to/. I find I can often educate DIYs enough to let them know that seo isn't simply backlinks and FB shares, but that they can positively affect their seo without the use of service pushers. However if in a competitive niche, they will know it's not reasonable to expect results if you explain it well (some people think internet is easy, push a button and pay off Google and you're good to go... you all know the type). At this point they are more willing to ask for help at this point where previously they would've been reluctant to accept it if I had offered. *mindfreak*. Convincing people to help themselves is the name of the game sometimes it seems. If you like that odd article, there's another piece in there with the same writing style called 'are you an ugly business?', I don't want to link spam this comment :P just search it, it's an old one. Talks about positioning yourself as more than an seo, you are a digital brand manager.
I get off topic often, point is i enjoy this piece and am thankful that my local market has quite low competitive values per capita so my job is often easy. Trouble is the low search data due to a lower population in my area has traditionally posed as a block to either profitability of certain markets thus no significant roi and immoral to pitch seo to them, or difficulty in narrowing terms to work on even when we had full use of the tools that are now diminished. It's good to get our brains working out of the box anyhow. I mean, I'm all for leveraging tech, but we still need to be more knowledgeable than the tech we are using to fully leverage its capabilities anyhow. Some of us have gotten lazy with things, this will weed out some of the weak links (evolutionary use of the word, not the internet use, you geeks :) ) that rely too heavily on our tech. Much like a high school student relying on a calculator all their life and doesn't know their times table. Always a silver lining :P
Thanx Rand. I think it will be very useful for marketers.
The only way I can think of to solve this problem is to create a browser plugin that captures and passes on the search data after Google redirects the user. Most users don't care or even know about referrer data, so the plugin would also need to provide an invaluable service, whilst being up front about what it does.
Alternatively this code could be added to existing plugins with large user bases, in the form of an update.
For now I was thinking about maybe putting an inline block on my sites inviting the user to tell us how they found us ie. type in the search phrase. It would only ask once, then be hidden. A bit like the UK cookie consent code.
Hi,
i have got a further "solution" to get better data as "not provided". We have got a own analytics software programmed called "argus". This system is tracking all data like google analytics but it also has a connection to out backend to import data from items that return back to us, so the we have got the "net sales".
For "not provided" SEO Traffic we programmed the following solution:
a) if its SEO "not provided" and the landing page is the homepage = brand traffic; keyword = "your brand_notprovided"
b) if its SEO "not provided" and the landing page is the a category page = product traffic; keyword = "category name _notprovided"
c) if its SEO "not provided" and the landing page is the a item detail page = product traffic; keyword = "item name_notprovided"
So, we know nearly exaktly what we do have with brand/product Keywords and we exaktly know the traffic and sales kpi´s to nearly which keywords.
Greetings from bavaria
Knut
Yes, it's very frustrating.
I wonder whether Google might argue that it's a necessary move in the fight against spam or am I being too generous to them?
I think this move is more to drive ad revenue than it is to reduce spam
Thanks Rand. Great education. Interested in your suggestion of "tracking search volume in buckets" and techniques surrounding this concept.
In general, from a brand point of view, contracting work hours from an agency, I'm not sure I want them to spend even more time "proving" their value. Just need to educate C-Suite...
Hi,
Thanks for sharing kind of stuff, I was wondering since few regarding the same. I am getting more than 60% (Not provided) keyword stuff in my Google Analytics Report.
To put this in another light, Google has just taken off the training wheels for our bicycles. What worked in the recent past still works... but it's just a bit harder to come around to the answer, and we're left with a lack of pure data to back up our decisions. If we are good at what we do... this is merely a bump in the road. If not... well, no one forgets how to fall off of a bicycle.
Good Topic Rand,
I have faced this issue a lot of times. However, I believe that with the passage of time Keywords optimization is getting fail. We need to focus on keyword but not in that way that we were doing few years back. SEO is moving into a entirely new generation.
Great WBT! Could another negative to this be that it makes it easier for small businesses to be ripped off by one of the more unscrupulous agencies out there e.g. "We'll rank you no.1 for <insert low volume, low competition, non converting keyword here>", business takes them on, they quickly appear on page one, they continue to retain agency... They can't tell if agency work is driving visits or not... but they do know they're on page one. And that's good, right? Yes, I know they could track total organic traffic or any of Rand's tips above etc... they probably don't.
Thanks for the information. Yes 'not provided' has been a headache for us at times.
Just one question.
If not Google Analytics, which other tracking tool can provide us precise data to track visitors, traffic sources, etc? Any good suggestions?
Thanks.
The issue is not the analytics tool (of Google). The data from Google (keywords data) is not send (at all).
True, but hey, if big G decided not to share search data, why should you share yours?
This is the reason why I have swiched to Piwik long time ago.
So is Piwik solution to this problem of "not Provided" ?
It's not the solution in that you can't get your data back, but some people are using piwik so they don't use Google Analytics.
Thanks Keri!
That's why I'm using piwik for my sites
All google search paths seem to ultimately lead to Googe PPC. Capitalism/Monopoly.
Can anyone further explain what Rand was referring to in section B of his White Board lecture? What does he mean by Track rankings on buckets of head vs. mid vs. long tail keywords.
Updates like these from google make these communities that much more value. Thanks for giving a Voice to the SEO community Rand!
Adwords we'll all be bidding to retrive keywords that will make search keywords much more expansive I would prefere rather a tool allowing to extract new opportunities via GWT even if not reliable 100% ! thanks Moz for working on this because already our time is short so don't need extra steps to find out what drives MY traffic !
Great overall white board discussion @Rand!
So much for don't be evil Google! I feel that the not provided increase is to encourage more Adwords usage. It seems that Google has really switched gears and is pushing for more revenue. I know clients of mine receive solicitations from Google for Adwords and upsells on existing campaigns.
Rand offered some great ideas to track this needed data. "How do I track Ranking? - You can't really" Gather a sample and it should give a decent indication of where you are showing.
What benefit is it for Google to do this? The only endgame I can see is they feel like marketers not having the ability and knowledge of their keyword traffic would make webspam harder. They seem to overlook the negative effects of this, ie. the web getting worse. If marketers don't know what's broken, how can they fix it? Time for Yahoo or Bing to step up. This is officially ridiculous.
You're my boy, Bing! Time to add a GA segment where Medium exactly matches organic, and Source matches regex (yahoo|bing): https://www.google.com/analytics/web/template?uid=MpdlRw1dT7Or2VRnOVV_LQ
The other factor here that no one is really talking about is this: there are a TON of SaaS companies that depend on keyword data from Google to provide value to their clients. These SaaS companies are up the creek without a paddle. For example, there are a few call tracking companies that provide keyword call tracking data...those days are over.
Dang! I finally got most of my clients to stop worrying about keyword positions. Now that is going to have to be one of the better metrics to follow, since showing them exactly what the effects are in organic traffic.
I don't see this as a good thing for anyone. Many of us used the organic search term data to help improve the content of the site so it would not just rank better, but be a better search result.
I've recently needed to provide keyword data, along with revenue for keywords that was generate by a client's e-commerce website. Around 60% of the generated revenue is from "not provided" which is such a pain in the back side. However by looking at webmaster tools you can build a rough picture of what people are searching for and where they're landing, but the issue still arises, how on earth do I know what keyword generated a £500 sale!? I can filter organic traffic, and then find out what category the product is in, but it still doesn't explicitly tell me what keywords lead to that purchase. :(
To echo many of the comments here, I think the most salient point is that nothing has been truly removed, it just takes longer to find what you're looking for.
Using Google Webmaster Tools/Search Queries and going through CTR is probably one of the most telling factors of what organic keywords are driving traffic to your site, though I know that this also reports on other Google products/partners in addition to just organic keywords on SERPs.
In the past, I used to use branded search terms and (not provided) as a basis to compare and contrast the % of New Visits, which generally seemed to indicate that the bulk of the (not provided) keywords may be the first step in finding the site, and now that we had made an impact through brand, the branded keywords yielded returning visitors who may be interested in converting at a later date.
In doing so, I also realized that by organizing the Analytics data by Title can be pretty transformative--looking at title tags and the pages that really get visited, you can kind of hazard a guess at the pathways and keywords that are driving them to those pages, since keywords will regularly appear in Page Titles.
I feel as if Google is really telling Internet Marketers: "Now is the time to cross-sell organic and PPC!" rather than "we are better complying with privacy regulations." For a company that prides itself on user experience to completely hide data that can be used to benefit the user, it's disheartening, to say the least.
One thing has been removed: Convenience
Thanks for brightening my day! I definitely laughed at that. Then immediately proceeded to hang my head in shame. Oh man...
Rand's point at the end is the real takeaway. (not provided) doesn't really take any data away, it's all still retrievable, just exponentially more difficult [and more expensive]. I'm going to keep a closer eye on specific keyword groups [branded, non-branded, product specific, etc.] in 3rd party rank tracking tools. Those reports may be a key identifier of future spikes or dips in keyword volume, as well as help me see the bigger picture [as Rand mentioned in the video].
Exceptional post. This is why I have been an avid MOZ fan for the past few years. You take a optimistic approach to the issues, or changes at hand. Ultimately at the end of the day, it is what it is. We as marketers, business owners, etc, will have to step up, modify our best practices, and evolve to influence our sites accordingly.
While this will make more work for us, it will make the end result much more rewarding in my opinion!
Personally, I think Google removing these tools is a bonus for the SEO industry. To echo the above comments, yes it will be tough for awhile, but there will be a tool that comes along and we will be just fine (probably better without the crutch of Analytics). If no tool is developed, we get the joy of analyzing data and truly tracking and monitoring our websites. It is a giant problem that we can solve because the information is out there, and SEO's know how to find it.
The bright side: Now, everybody has their data removed from Analytics, and this is going to weed out the individuals that were using this as a tool to do their own SEO. Also, it will take many of the chumps out of SEO that have been extracting money from customers and using the easy to read and generate Google Analytic reports. If you have been building websites on solid SEO foundations and paying attention to your market you know what keywords drive traffic to your site.
More bright side: This includes a lot of businesses who had been doing their own SEO and now are potential customers. This development increases the demand and value of our skill set because before anybody could insert the tracking code from Analytics by following a few simple steps and be able to monitor their website's progress. Now, it is a trade that requires analytical skill and deductive reasoning.
Hey SEO4Attorneys,
I'm glad that you agree with my way of thinking! It seems that there are one or two folk who disliked my opinion enough to hit the thumb down button on me lol.
I can see this backfire on Goolge to an extent too... They seem to have had more criticism over this than I would have expected and it's certainly sending waves across the net right now. I just wonder how stormy things will get.
I'm a bit late to the party here, so I might not get any responses to this Q, but here goes anyway.
What I don't see anyone discussing above is exactly which data is Google hiding from us and why currently. To clarify, if we are not seeing 70% of the information; which information is it? Is that info from searchers with Google accounts? Info from searchers that have opted out? Certain browser settings? Certain queries? Certain locations? I realise Google is changing things (as is their wont), but which things? Until we know that, (until it gets to 100% and doesn't matter) then making informed decisions is obviously a lot harder.
No perfect solution to this problem of "Not Provided". As of now the instant solution is only Bing, Hope its user base increases.
Well RAND !
Its really amazing research and great white board.
Basically its a big deal - not to provided keywords and then its happens naturally.
Thanks to share this great article
Regards
Denish verma
DnaWebSolution
WOW! It's new Whiteboard "Tuesday". Well it’s an excellent post Respected Mr. Rand. I and my boss had much conversation about “not provided” in Google Analytics on. Now I got the point what should I do when “not provided” in 100% organic search.
Rand, I have a question…. If “not provided” showing in analytics, will it hamper my website Traffic?
Hi Rand,
Google has done a huge philosophical change that literally just turned the Search Engine Optimization industry on its head (and shook really, really hard). Ironically, driving up [not provided] makes us more reliant on rank-tracking. Not really a positive move for us or Google, long-term.
I am a part of seo team and going to say that there are more then that we do even you tell here. As the first comment as that your main aim is to satisfy the client here is also the same point. We never do anything else, suppose our client ask us to generate some leads to increase their sales, then they are not asking to rank it.
But still we do the seo for their site and its definitely works. I also read the same topic on
But your provided data is more efficient then others. and give lot of new information .. thank
Google was never really our friend guys, why are you so surprised ? They are not just a search engine anymore and have much bigger fish to fry, we have just been eating craps falling off the table for years unfortunately they are no longer leaving scraps behind , check out details of Google's Financial year
Excellent!
Always good to see light in the dark when the dark seems overwhelming. It certainly makes life a little more difficult. What I'm not understanding is why Google keep making these rash decisions?
I think Google may re-release the data in a paid version of Google Analytics somewhere down the line - what do you think? It can't all be AdWords related...
It's called Enterprise....
Although expensive, I think my favorite way to monitor search traffic to my site in the future will be via Adwords, but this is what Google wants isn't it!
Hey AsteroidSEO,
Although it may already be your preference, I think you probably are playing right into the sniggering hands of Google. Having said that though, it is your preference and perhaps worth sticking with anyway. You never know... We may all be forced to join you soon enough lol!
Keyword data has been going missing for a long time. I've learned to make do with what's in Webmaster Tools and Adwords. I'm more concerned about the lack of a PageRank update :p
Good on ya, Rand! You said what we're all feeling - Google has eschewed its motto: "Don't be evil." Also, I appreciate you offering alternative approaches to consider.
A lot of Marketers are facing the same problem and for sure (not provided) will be 100% in future.
There is no easy way to track data behind (not provided) but I think we can do that using custom events _trackEvent code of Google Analytics with in Events Reports. AJ Kohn did a great post of New Ways To Track Keyword Rank in Google Analytics in which he mentions that we can track keyword and its ranking position using custom events.
using a code something like this.
if (document.referrer.match(/google\.com/gi) && document.referrer.match(/cd/gi)) {
var myString = document.referrer;
var r = myString.match(/cd=(.*?)&/);
var rank = parseInt(r[1]);
var kw = myString.match(/q=(.*?)&/);
if (kw[1].length > 0) {
var keyWord = decodeURI(kw[1]);
} else {
keyWord = "(not provided)";
}
var p = document.location.pathname;
_gaq.push(['_trackEvent', 'RankTracker', keyWord, p, rank, true]);
}
Although he do has put an if condition for (not provided). I think we can track the complete data by removing this condition or by making some customization in this code. I am sorry i am not a programer but i need to consult it with a programer to track user search query from the google search url. such as https://www.google.com/#q=samsung+mobiles (Keyword=samsung mobiles)
if we can track this query using some code. we can get a full access data behind (not provided).
I am going to try this small trick if this works i will definitely share it with every one.
Unfortunately, it still requires Google to pass the keyword in the referral string, which is what's been removed in this latest action (technically, all keyword referrals will simply show as "not provided")
Ohhh I see! Thanks for the clearance :) I am kinda shocked keywords from referral strings is been removed. Damn Google has blocked all possible ways to track data behind (not provided) :(
If Google are made to do this won't Bing et al have to follow suit?
Google wasn't made to do this, they chose to, but they've been heading in this direction for some time to try and force people into PPC advertising.
Cheers.. I read the bit about the NSA wrong... I thought the NSA were making them when it fact they're using the NSA situation to justify their actions.
So what happens when everyone moves over to PPC?
No need to create compelling content anymore to attract links.. we can just send users to our money pages via Adwords. The savings we'll make on content development will be used to fuel PPC.
The natural index will be full of commercial content because no ones bothering to create info content anymore because they're all relying on Adwords for traffic not the natural index.
Then users stop using the natural index because it's full of commercial content so advertisers stop paying to be on Adwords
Brill :)
I wonder if the NSA will find a way to get the data regardless, also, how important this data is to the NSA anyway.
If this is a move by Google to get more people using PPC, that is a bad idea and Bing would be foolish to follow suit. It’s just as Syndrome (villain in “The Incredibles”) said: “And when I'm old and I've had my fun, I'll sell my inventions so that *everyone* can have powers. *Everyone* can be super! And when everyone's super ... no one will be.”
Users want to know they are getting good results. I avoid clicking on ads for two reasons:
1) just because they had enough money to buy an ad does not mean they got rich enough to afford ads because they’re good at what they do or sell (like a paid-for TV ad with actors giving scripted testimonials—why should I believe you when you were paid to say you’re number one?!?) and
2) because they could simply be thieves who got rich scamming innocent people and have launched a new ad campaign to do it all again. Cynical, I know. J
I want to know I’m getting a better choice than who can pay the most money to be listed first. Organic results are a better bet (possibly the lesser of two evils) because they’re like the People's Choice Awards or something. They must get lots of users to their site if they're this high up on the SERPs, which means they must be doing something right with the goods or services they’re promoting.
Depending on what I’m searching for, I rarely click the first or second organic result, though, because I don't trust that they haven't gotten to that spot through black-hat techniques. I know that, as a user, I feel better about clicking something someone has worked for / earned rather than paid for.
just another way to increase the revenue from ads,Nice presentation just found the same form Rise to the top.
If you have extensive Adwords campaigns, make sure you make sure of the new Paid & Organic reports in there. No historical data but it will give you plenty of organic keyword data. I was at a Google event the other week and asked them about the accuracy of this data and they said it is pulled through in the same way as Google Webmaster Tools but it isn't rounded. Therefore, I think it should be more accurate and it certainly collates well with the data I do still have on organic keywords in Adobe Analytics. It's not perfect, but then what is these days?
https://adwords.blogspot.co.uk/2013/08/analyze-and-optimize-your-search.html
Would like to know the benefit Google is having in taking out the keywords from analytics?
Adwords?!
The lure for Google is to push marketers towards Adwords, esp. with holidays right around the corner.
I was Whiteboard Tuesday not FRIDAY !! Any ways nice topic.
The title of this post is "When Keyword (not provided) is 100 Percent of Organic Referrals, What Should Marketers Do? - Whiteboard Tuesday", which clearly states Whiteboard Tuesday.
Can you clarify what is wrong with this so we can fit it? Thanks!
Wow, there is a wonderfully deep well of information and discussion here, well done!
We are seeking participants to take part in a free beta trial trial of a Not Provided Tool.
The Not Provided Tool uses neural networks to learn about the visits to your site. A model is created from your known visitor data by automated learning from past visitor patterns. Once the tool’s learning is complete, the model is then used to unpick (not provided) visits – providing insights into the most likely keywords used. This provides a level of keyword insight that is currently unavailable.
If you would like to register your interest in participating please visit:
https://notprovidedtool.com/
Hi Rand ,
thanks for sharing good thoughts
This is what he said. :)
Rand had explained the same.