Google Encrypted Search: Curious George or War Games?

By Rich Devine | May 26, 2010 4:48:45 PM

If you are a search marketer, and you haven’t been locked in your basement playing Dungeons & Dragons while your ranking reports run, you’ve probably heard -- and either shrugged or freaked out – about Google’s announced launch of 'encrypted search'.

In a nut-shell, this secure version (https) of Google is supposed to allow users to freely search without fear of their search behavior being ‘observed’. Google’s own Search-Spam-Czar (not an official Obama administration post), Matt Cutts, issued a congratulatory blog post extolling the ‘inspiration’ of encrypted search. Cutts cites an example of working from your laptop on public Wi-Fi at the coffee shop – he celebrates the option of using Google’s encrypted search so that the coffee shop can’t oversee what you are searching.

Seriously? Unless you are Jason Bourne or Jack Bauer, do you really think the pimpled-teenager serving your venti mocha caffe latte con panna gives a decaf about your searches for the latest Chuck Norris jokes?

 

Is this a big deal?

Let’s talk about what this means for search and digital marketers. All respect to Matt Cutts (who is deservedly loved and revered -- especially by ZAAZ’s own Ryan Jones, our resident Matt Cutts serial tweet-stalker), but this is not about coffee shop Googling. Matt's blog didn't include an example of the poor search marketing manager trying to optimize her site only to find that Google’s encrypted search won’t pass the search referral data that is so central to her efforts.

And that’s the crux of the issue for us as search marketers: whether we will or won’t get that lovely referral data. For a rather fatalistic treatment on referral data implications, check out this blog by the equally revered Danny Sullivan.

Clearly, there’s a wide range of opinion and speculation over what this may or may not mean. Where do you fall? Let’s go back to business school and break out the trusty-rusty 2x2 box matrix to plot the wide range of sentiment on the topic. If you’re a search marketer, you should fall into one of the following quadrants. We’ll call this the Google Encrypted Search Freak-Out Matrix (GESFOM):

How freaked out we should or shouldn’t be is based on two big unknowns as reflected by the variables in our GESFOM (rolls off the tongue doesn't it?). First, how widely will Google scale its encrypted version of search? Will it truly remain as an opt-in only feature for the paranoid and cautious who are adept enough to add an ‘s’ to http://google.com? Or will Google scale this much more widely, either offering opt-out or no ‘opt’ at all?

Second variable is the impact to your search marketing efforts. How will you perform keyword research? How will you analyze the impact of referred keyword searches to your site? How will you attribute success to your search marketing efforts?

For now, I’m somewhere in the lower right quadrant of the Matrix. I’m Curious George. This is interesting enough for me to take notice and wonder about the monkey-mischief that could result – but as of now, this simply isn’t scaled widely enough to affect referral data to the point where I can’t take effective optimization action as a search marketer.

However, what happens if Google does widen the scale of encrypted search? What if they go bananas and just make this the default search experience? Well friends, then my GESFOM status goes to DEFCON-5 status, I go Matthew Broderick-crazy, and I start playing tic-tac-toe with a chimpanzee named Virgil.

 

Why is Google doing this?

On its face, this really is all about privacy for Google. But as we discussed above, this is not about protecting your Chuck Norris searches from the Starbucks dude. This is about Google more than it is about you. Google is proactively (or reactively) addressing potential legal and regulative vulnerability and ultimately trying to protect its own business interests and maintain shareholder value. Nothing wrong with that -- its what businesses do.

Ironically Google, for all the  not-so-veiled enmity they’ve had for Microsoft – is Microsoft in 2010. They are a dominant force in a relatively un-trodden and un-regulated industry. And dominant businesses are prime targets for stone throwing governments and lawyers.

This may be as simple as Google being mindful of the prolonged mess that Microsoft was mired in with the Department of Justice, the even more ridiculous battle Microsoft fought with the European Union, and the recent trouble Facebook has ‘Faced’ with privacy. Google has enjoyed a long run with relatively minimal trouble on the regulatory or legal side -- considering how dominant they really are. Providing encrypted search, could be nothing more than a bases-covering business decision.

 

Moving forward

As noted, there are just too many unknowns that need to become knowns before we can determine where we’ll end up with this, or how truly impactful this will be to long-term search marketing efforts, especially as related to referral data. Hopefully Google will be mindful of our small, humble community of search marketers who rely on sources of referral traffic data to do our job -- data which we use in ways that do not infringe upon individual privacy.

Google may limit the scale of encrypted search, or pass data in a more formal way to marketers and analytics vendors. Too soon to tell just yet – but let’s have some faith that Google avoids anything that would drive us into GESFOM/DEFCON/Matthew Broderick/Chimpanzee insanity.

Searching for 10,000 Missing Kittens

By Dmitria Burby | May 20, 2010 2:15:50 PM

Recently, the conversation of matching paid search clicks (from Google or Dart) to paid search site side reporting (Omniture or WebTrends) came back on the radar. I have had this same conversation many times in the past and have given many good reasons, but the truth of the matter is that the two sets of numbers will never match and we as a collective group should stop trying to get them to match. The two systems are both correct, it is not so much that there is a data ‘discrepancy’ - which implies error, as it is data ‘difference’ – meaning that there are different purposes for the two data sets. There are also implications with how the data is passed and measured (which we discuss below).
   
Data from paid search providers is concerned with reporting on individual actions (clicks), because it goes to how investments are made on individual keywords. Web analytics is generally concerned with data corresponding to individuals – which is why referral sources are often reported in terms of 'visits' or ‘visitors’ – and so if there is multiple search queries occurring from one ‘visitor’ web analytics will generally only report that single visitor as the referral.
   
Take for example that you have bought the keyword, "Kittens" (don't ask why I chose this word, I couldn't come up with something more appropriate). Google is reporting that you have 30,000 paid clicks on the keyword "Kittens," yet your site side reporting shows that you only have 20,000 paid click-throughs on "Kittens." Where are the other 10,000 clicks going?
   
I know that is hard to believe that both systems are correct when your clicks are 30% or even 40% higher than the click-throughs that are captured site side, but it is true. Think about it this way, the click is the intent to view content on your site and the click-through is the actual action of seeing content on your site. A lot can happen between the click of a content targeting link or keyword and browsing through site content.
     
Think about the fundamental differences in log file based tracking and javascript/tag based tracking. When the transition to javascript/tag tracking started we had several clients that wanted to compare the numbers from both sets of data. More often than not, we saw that the javascript/tag based tracking was between 20% and 50% lower than the log file based tracking. This shouldn't be surprising as tag based tracking was a much more accurate count of what visitors were doing on your site. The point of this statement is that there is a fundamental difference in the amount of content that servers serve up and the amount of content that is consumed by true consumers or visitors. Take the same approach with media reporting, there is a difference in the amount of content that is served up and reported as "clicked" versus the number of "click-throughs" that reach your site.
   
Some items that are noteworthy and difficult to change, but give some explanation of where those 10,000 clicks are:

• In addition to focusing on clicks vs. visitors, paid search assumes ‘match’ caveats for it’s keyword referral data. In other words "Kittens" may be the bidded term, but if matching parameters are tied to that term (broad, phrase) the data corresponding to that term would include dozens or hundreds of specific queries that included the word “Kittens”. Whereas site side analytics report on the actual keywords typed by the user, say "pink kittens," "stuffed kittens", etc.
• If paid search is using ‘content networks’ that click data will be reported as paid-search clicks, whereas web analytics tools will report those as site referrals like http://www.pinkkittendanceschool.com/blog/ (again, I apologize for the direction this example has taken)
• Some of the clicks on banners and paid search bounce from the site (or never reach the site) before the site side analytics tag fires. This happens more than you would think since the click is tracked on the search side before the redirect takes place.
• Every so often the tracking tags are dropped by the search engines.
• Filters on site side metrics can exclude clicks. Examples of this may be exclusion of internal traffic, spiders, etc.
• First Party Cookies and Third Party Cookies are handled differently by browsers.

     
With all of that being said, there are still ways to ensure that the numbers being reported are as close as possible.

• Ensure tags are placed on all of your paid search activities and all pages on your site.
• Ensure that the reporting attribution windows are the same in both tools.

   
Once you have taken the steps to ensure the data is as accurate as possible, do an audit to gain a baseline understanding of what the discrepancy is for your company. Understand, acknowledge and educate the consumers of the paid search data on why the data sets have a discrepancy and agree within your organization which source of truth you are going to use. Since most organizations are looking at behavioral data through tools like Omniture or WebTrends, it often makes sense to use these tools are the primary source of data to understand what people do once they land on the site.
   

Who Will Be the Next Big Digital Analytics Tool? Hint: Some People Might Not "Like" It

By Chris Kerns | May 13, 2010 1:39:12 PM

Creating Compelling iPad Apps

By Anders Rosenquist | May 7, 2010 4:06:16 PM

Apple's iPad has only been on the market for two months, but already it is changing how we engage with content. The iPad is poised to change the landscape of magazine publishing—both in how readers consume their favorite editorial content, and in how magazines, struggling with the decline of print readership and advertising, can grow their revenue streams in new and immersive ways. 

After Steve Jobs announced the coming of the iPad in January 2010, the editors and publishers of Entertainment Weekly magazine wanted to create an iPad app to coincide with the launch of the new product. We positioned the opportunity for Entertainment Weekly as compelling, easily consumable editorial content tied to e-commerce—the magazine’s first step toward- redefining its future and creating a new business paradigm.

The app takes a simple and very popular feature of the magazine, "The Must List"— featuring the Top 10 pop culture phenomena of the moment—and presents it in a playful, interactive set of panels that makes excellent use of the iPad’s scale, touch interface and visual punch. (free download from iTunes)

I recently sat down with ZAAZ's Jon McVey, Executive Creative Director, and Tim Klauda, Creative Director, to talk about their strategic and creative work on EW's ipad app.. 

This is the first iPad app for Entertainment Weekly magazine. Why was EW interested in creating an iPad app?

Jon: I'd say their motivation was similar to what we are seeing across the publishing world: The iPad is a second chance. Publishers first tried to bring their print content to the Web, but they didn't do it right. You don't have to look far to find examples of high-profile failures in the magazine world. Established publications like Gourmet magazine are gone.   Publishers are seeing the iPad as a do-over, another opportunity at doing digital right. It’s a godsend to them. So it goes beyond the business drivers for Entertainment Weekly—it is the future of the industry. And if you look at it from the financial side, there is no revenue share in the print version. But on the iPad, not only can you go deeper on the editorial content, you can also read a review, and then buy the soundtrack, watch the trailer, buy movie tickets, etc. 

What excites you most about creating experiences on the iPad?

Tim: It's simply awesome to design for a touch screen of this size. It’s the closest connection between the consumer and the content that we've seen. There’s no mouse or cursor–you just touch the content to interact with it. Another exciting angle is the way people approach mobile now, and how it fits into their lives. People expect more from technology than they ever have before. The iPad isn’t mobile in the same way that the iPhone is, but it’s perfect for curling up with on a sofa, cooking with in the kitchen, flying cross country…things where the bulk of a laptop is intrusive and the size of a phone is annoying. You have the opportunity to be intimate with the content or easily pass it around a room to share.

Jon: It represents a whole new way of thinking about things. I'm a big magazine lover, and with an iPad app, I’m able to check articles out, have them on hand, with no big piles of print magazines.  Now I can read an article, get more information and buy related items, all in one intimate experience.  It allows for richer storytelling.

The iPad is more of a lifestyle object, and the apps are mainly about your lifestyle. Because you can choose them, they’re an extension of you. A laptop represents work, but it’s fun time when you are on the iPad. 

What was different about creating for Web vs. for the iPad?  What can you do for the iPad that you couldn't do when creating a website?

Jon: The Web is clunky. But the iPad is fast and responsive. You get to the content pretty quick.  You don't have to put as much on a page. 

Tim:  You don't have Web conventions. … You don't need a site map for an app.  It’s refreshing to design for something very specific. It allows you to hone in on the relationship between the content and the person engaging with it. 

How did you decide on what features to include in the app?

Tim: We didn't really talk about it in terms of features. We talked about the content that makes up the Must List, and how we'd enhance it.     For some sites, you focus on functionality—scope, features—and then roll content into it.   You make a shell, then someone will write the content and the site displays it.

For an app, the content is the feature. You start with how the content can be relevant to someone and how it affects that persons lifestyle, then we extended that experience. For the Must List, we have 10 things. Some are books, some are movies—and then we help the user act on them.

Will you adapt the iPad app for mobile phones? 

Tim: The Entertainment Weekly app will come out on the iPhone as well. It will have the same content and a similar experience, but we had to rethink the UI a little bit.  For example, it’s easier to use on the go with one thumb.  The experience needs to fits the device. The iPhone is about lists and getting there, rather than interacting with the list before getting there.  The iPad requires more of an investment in the experience.

What recommendations do you have for brands interested in developing an iPad app?

Tim: They need to look at all the mobile devices – iPad, iPhone, Windows, Android. They need to see where their audience is, and look at what their brand has to offer each device.  The iPad has a particular type of engagement and interface. What can they add to someone passing around an iPad in a home or office vs. walking down street with iPhone? You can’t just import straight Web or magazine content and expect it to work. You need to pick a core piece of your brand and focus on that.

How is the app doing in the Apple App Store?

Tim: The EW app was featured in the New and Noteworthy section in the app store, and that brought it up into the store’s Top 20 free apps.   

Thanks to Jon and Tim for sharing their insight on creating for the iPad!

Google getting Bingy with it.

By Rich Devine | May 6, 2010 2:53:04 PM

Silly Google. Their new search results look remarkably similar in functionality to what Microsoft rolled out with Bing. At the time Google said they're just fine standing pat. Now they're saying that they've always been adjusting the presentation, usability, and functionality of their results.

Come on Google, it's okay to admit that Microsoft did something well -- and now you're making an effort to follow suit. http://ow.ly/1HW56

What is your delivery vs. demand ratio for search marketing?

By Rich Devine | May 4, 2010 3:36:05 PM

Despite my best efforts, graduate school taught me all about financial ratios. Financial ratios are key indicators of a firm's overall financial health and performance. Drawn from financial statements, our nerdy finance friends polish their thick glasses, find two numbers from a financial statement and divide one number by another to arrive at a simple ratio. They look at liquidity ratios, asset turnover ratios, profitability ratios, dividend ratios, etc.

Similarly, many of us use analytics data to inform 'key performance indicators' related to our digital marketing efforts. KPIs are great, but they generally carry relevant meaning only for my business, not necessarily yours. How we derive formulas for KPIs is also very specific to our own business and data sources. For example, your definition and formula for 'conversion' is probably much different than mine.

Financial ratios, however, are basic enough to be relevant across businesses. All finance professionals use the same basic ratios. Because they are meaningful across the board, they are particularly helpful for comparing businesses within industries.

For search marketing, we often conduct performance audits that directly assess site health or campaign effectiveness for SEO and SEM respectively. These deep-dive evaluations are important, but like financial ratios, search ratio analysis helps us understand the comparative search performance of clients within an industry or competitive set.

One ratio we typically use to help clients understand existing performance compared to potential is the Delivery vs. Demand ratio. We use this ratio for both Natural and Paid Search.

Demand refers to the estimated keyword volume relevant to your brand or business. You can look at forecasted  or historical volumes -- doesn't matter.

Delivery reflects the estimated traffic comes to a brand's web site from SEM and SEO sources.Competitive analytics tools like Compete.com are great resources for this data.

Let's look at an example of Delivery/Demand ratios:
The graph above shows delivery/demand ratios for furniture web sites. If all sites were equally optimized for SEO, we would expect to see Traffic from SEO scale up or down with demand. Likewise, if each business valued paid search marketing equally, we'd expect to see delivery from SEM scale with each brand's respective search demand.

Notice, however, the discrepancy in delivery/demand ratios between brands -- both for SEO and SEM.

The SEM ratio is simply a reflection of investment -- we can see that both Crate and Barrel and West Elm have committed investment to paid search. Comparatively, the other companies are considerably under-invested. So if I'm Dania, I need to ask myself, "Why is West Elm willing to outspend me by 6x even though search demand for my brand is almost 3x that of West Elm?"

On the SEO side, the ratio clearly demonstrates the lack of delivery compared to demand for Dania and to some degree Room and Board. Based on estimated keyword demand, Dania should be earning more traffic than all competitors except for Crate and Barrel. But Dania is barely scraping any delivery from SEO, and it's not even close.

Of course the ratio doesn't tell us what is wrong with Dania's SEO efforts or lack thereof, nor what needs to be done -- but the ratio provides a quick-hit red flag that Dania should seriously evaluate their site for SEO.

So now that we see a red flag, let's see if there really is a difference between Dania's on-site SEO compared to West Elm who is seeing much more delivery.

As a really basic example of SEO effectiveness between brands, let's compare Dania's title tag usage to West Elm's:

 
 

Sure enough, Dania is not well optimized for title tags, and West Elm really seems to be consciously optimizing their tags effectively. And if you take a deeper look, beyond just title tags, West Elm has done a fairly nice job of SEO across the board, while Dania has some clear opportunities for improvement.

Whereas SEO audits and SEM assessments provide introspective insights -- ratio analysis provides comparative value for clients to understand, unequivocally, how they fare against industry standards or competitors.

Performance ratios are also ideal metrics for your scorecards, either as top level KPIs or side-bar indicators.

Here are some helpful rules for using ratio analysis:

1. Keep them simple: Remember it's one number divided by another.

2. Internal and External Relevance: Ratios should be meaningful not just to your own business -- but ratio formulas should be widely relevant and usable across businesses or industries.

3. Estimates vs. Accuracy: Much of the data you use for ratio analysis can be drawn from free or paid competitive sources. There is wide discrepancy in forecasted demand, and delivery data between sources -- but accuracy isn't really our objective -- as long as you can get a sense for proportion, that's all we need to generate a valid ratio.

4. Actionable: As with all analytics, focus on ratios that provide actionable insight and avoid ratios that are just nice to know.

So now that I've shown you mine, show me yours. What other simple ratios can you use for search marketing?