© Jellyfish Online Marketing Ltd 2011

Jellyfish POV SEO SSL 09| 12| 2011

Jellyfish POV SEO SSL

PAGE 2

Introduction Would you like to understand which SEO keywords are driving traffic, interaction and conversions on your website? Of course, because it allows us to focus SEO effort (via on-site optimisation, links and social) on the best performing keywords in your target portfolio. So how does losing 10%, 20%, 30% or an even higher % of this invaluable insight sound? Well, it sounds like a bad, bad deal for any brand currently active in SEO activity. But that‟s the reality as of October this year, and it‟s not likely to change. So what‟s this all about, how is it affecting websites, and what can we do about this issue? Background There‟s been an avalanche of discussion and comment over Google‟s Q3 announcement regarding the encryption of organic search results, and resulting impact for online marketing professionals. Here‟s the official / original post from the Google blog, October 18

th 2011, titled „making search more secure‟:

“This change encrypts your search queries and Google‟s results page. When you search from https://www.google.com, websites you visit from our organic search listings will still know that you came from Google, but won't receive information about each individual query.” In other words, for signed in Google users, analytics won‟t clarify the keywords used to drive SEO engagement on site. According to the Google Analytics blog, the change will mean that:

The organic click will be identified as coming from Google. The organic click will be identified as "organic" but will no

longer display the query string. The organic click will be identified under the token "not

provided" within Organic Search Traffic Keyword reporting. Secure site searches that lead to clicks via search ads, will

Jellyfish POV SEO SSL

PAGE 3

still provide the search (keyword). So, webmasters / publishers will see PPC channel data at keyword level, but not SEO data from signed in users. Comment from the digital marketing community was (to say the least) unenthusiastic, and a flurry of data quickly followed, attempting to clarify the impact of this change on the visibility of keyword level SEO data. Some data – who is signed in, and how is it affecting websites? According to Search Engine Watch: The estimated number floating around in online rumours is "7% of people searching Google.com", which is about 69 million people worldwide according to Eli Goodman from comScore OK, what does the data look like? First up, analysis indicates that Matt Cutts' initial prediction that the percentage of keywords reported with (not provided) would be within a single digit, appears to be a little wide of the mark:

In fact, the not provided % is around 15%. Econsultancy also reported high figures; „a staggering 362 page views out of a total 1,138 are showing no keyword data. That‟s around 33%. One in three search referrals from the US do not pass

Jellyfish POV SEO SSL

PAGE 4

on any search query data.‟ But hold on< recent Search Engine Watch commentary states that:

‘The amount of data being hidden thanks to Google's SSL search decision has been climbing steadily but now seems to be levelling out at 9% of traffic’.

Jellyfish POV SEO SSL

PAGE 5

So, estimates vary from 10% to 30%.....so far. And a final slice of data from SEOmoz: here's a visualization of 60 sites' analytics data, showing the self-reported percent of their Google search traffic that used keyword "(not provided)" <.up to 12% and growing.

How will this % change in the future?

As Google services proliferate, aiming to land-grab the „always logged in‟ Facebook type user, we can expect to see a broader spread of users who are continually signed in to Google. Google‟s historic focus on new media early adopters (a small / single digit % of all web users) will evolve as users embrace Google + (Google co-founder and chief executive Larry Page has claimed that its online social networking service Google+ has got 40 million

Jellyfish POV SEO SSL

PAGE 6

users), and new services such as Google Music and Google Voice (both US only at this point) are rolled out to a broader global audience.

So why encrypt this data?

Because we‟re grown-ups, let‟s set aside Google‟s stated explanation (reminder – „making search more secure‟!). Here are the contenders: Google wants to shut out ad networks who use keyword level data for new types of targeting based on keyword level search data (we say - believable, but limited in ambition). Google wants to make analytics users cough up for a premium version where this data is not encrypted (we say – again, believable, but hardly a route to riches?) Google wants to encourage additional adwords spend at the expense of SEO budgets (we say – likely – see below for why)

The (just?) war against SEO

Consider the following: Google‟s main algorithm updates have made the „business‟ of SEO progressively more difficult. To clarify, there‟s nothing inherently wrong with making it harder to „game‟ SEO results; search spam is spam, and better sites deserve better visibility. It‟s just that the growth of more subtle and distributed signalling mechanism obstructs the ROI principles around SEO, because results are harder to predict, achieve and maintain. Which maybe is how it should be. Google claim that SEO data is still there; for some time, Google Webmaster Central has allowed sites to discover the terms that people are using to reach their web sites. This will continue to be offered, and that will remain a welcome alternative to the loss of referrer data. However, this does not provide clarity between keywords and vital analytics insights such as goals, conversion

Jellyfish POV SEO SSL

PAGE 7

paths etc. A half baked solution at best. UK companies spend significant amounts on SEO; about 20% less than PPC, but still a good chunk of change. If SEO ROI was no longer clear, where would you spend it? And the killer blow; PPC data remains fully visible. So if this is about privacy, why, why, why? Case rested.

Last words

Reminder – those data estimates show that right now, the best to worst case scenarios are between 10% - 30%. Actual data and %s will be site specific and strongly influenced by your user base. So, do ensure that your analytics are properly configured – you need to understand impact on traffic engagement, leads, conversions; ideally, all goals. For now keep a close eye on those (not provided) numbers. For the future, there is no fix, unless Google decides to revert back. As they say, there is always hope. And a final word from SEOmoz‟s Rand Fishkin:

‘The underselling of the change as being "single digits" was lame. The hypocrisy around keyword privacy sucks. And their motivations are questionable at best. But the crummiest part is the impact the change will have. It won't put any black hats out of business, won't stop any malware or hacking, and won't add a shred of value to the Internet. But it will make it harder for marketers and site builders to measure, understand and improve for their audience. The net impact will be a slightly worse web, and Google's claim of privacy will only protect them from criticism because it's a far easier explanation than the truth.’