|
Google constantly updated it's algo to prevent the conventional way of landing to the search engine results pages. Link Marketing is not gonna work if you do not do it effectively and progressively. Some SEO specialist are forcing their way to the top by creating ambiguous contents and under the radar link building for immediate results. We should adjust to this kind of situation and to things slowly.
Saying like that makes it sound even worse but that's what it is...
Yeah, this is what I'm saying: Google could have instituted a policy where all search terms were blocked from referrers, to protect user privacy. I would have disagreed with that, but I would have respected it.
Instead, they're saying they protect user privacy -- unless they're paid to look the other way.
True, Google has egg on its face over this change, and I expect that you are right, that it will be rolled back. I just can't see Google going the other way and favoring user privacy over the interests of its real paying customers (the advertisers).
It seems that way except advertisers will still see user search terms. We're looking at partial privacy with this change...
The change also makes sense for the end user, who may well say "It is not anybody's business what I search for." That is Google's publicly proclaimed reason for making the change.
You read it right. This change makes no sense except for advertisers. It's nice to think of a fully secured web environment but that system is a little broken to be widely adopted. See Andrew Froelich's post about SSL at Enterprise Efficiency. I don't see how this will work longterm. I suspect this referrer issue may be reversed in the future. I hope Google handles back pedaling better than Netflix.
SearchEngineLand posted an analysis on Saturday: Google puts a price on privacy.
I don't entirely understand the article; it assumes a level of knowledge of SEO and search that I don't possess. But he seems to be saying that the change from Google makes no sense other than as a way to make its ads more valuable by making organic search less valuable. Am I reading it right?
That's the impression I got with this announcement. I do quite a bit of SEO work and this change could affect my longterm results, be it by 2% or 11%. Lower click-through-rates are lower no matter the percentage.
I do remember that article that said they change a few hundred disks a day but I did not necessarily equate that to cheap. I associated it with the high volume of transactions that those spindles must be handling.
|
 |
|
|
leadership reports
The proliferation of smartphones and tablet devices presents new opportunities and challenges for marketers to reach customers where they are and when they’re ready to buy. Apps, the mobile Web, social check-ins, geofencing, and mobile ad standards are among the tools marketers need to master in this new world. Learn how to use new mobile technology effectively and avoid its hazards.
LEARN MORE
 
|
|
Tweet This
