Google’s Two Tiered Internet World Sinks to a New Low
Posted on June 20th, 2008by Michael Gray in Google
Today Google released an new feature that gives away traffic stats and keywords for most websites on the internet. However what everyone failed to notice is that Google laid everyone else bare, naked and exposed but kept their own stats locked up and private.
Here you can see the stats and keywords for my website, while they aren’t 100% accurate [SEO Blog] is one of my top terms. Here you can see [Searchengineland.com] and [Webmasterworld.com]. Google gave us all up without consent or prior permission.
Here are the stats for [yahoo.com] and [live.com]. But here’s where we reach a new, low look at stats for [google.com]
No Data … zero … zip … zilch … nada the big fat goose egg. So the one bit of data Google can give with 100% accuracy, and what did they do they hide it from you. They Give up Microsoft and Yahoo without batting an eye but Google.com, oh no they don’t have to play by the same rules, they’re special, they’re better, they’re exempt.
If this doesn’t convince you that Google doesn’t feel that you are entitled to the same rights they have I don’t know what will. If this doesn’t convince you that Google feels some sense of privilege that they have you don’t, I don’t know how to open your eyes and make it any clearer. Google sees you as a commodity, like a piece of office furniture, or a herd of cattle, you exist for the purpose of Google to use however they see fit. Google sees itself as the absolute ruler of the internet and there’s nothing you can do to stop it.
Google stop making programs like this opt-out instead of opt-in. If you don’t think enough people would do it, then take the hint it’s bad idea and kill it before it goes public. Stop treating everyone like they are children and feeling that you know better. Stop trying to create new world order to fulfill some delusional ideal of an information utopia you dream about.
At the very least give us some say about how much information you are willing to give up about us. How long before you decide to start publishing people’s names who conduct searches for homosexual topics, because you feel it’s in their best interests to be honest with their friends and families. How long before you start publishing the identities of people who search for mental disorders because you want to help them get cured. How long will it be before you publish the data of people who search for religious, political or other topics.
How long Google … how long before you sell our very souls to your damn algorithm … just because it’s part of your mission statement …
Added:
They are also not giving data for youtube.com or blogger.com but are giving up metacafe and wordpress.com …
Popularity: 23% [?]
Sphere: Related Content
.gif)
June 20th, 2008 at 10:35 pm
This is seriously crossing the line. That sort of data was HIGHLY confidential with a lot of people. WAS!
June 20th, 2008 at 10:42 pm
Wow, they keep pushing the envelope on what’s acceptable. It’s insane the stuff that people let them get away with simple because they are Google. Thanks for pointing this out & starting the conversation.
June 20th, 2008 at 10:50 pm
I assume the goal is to motivate people to purchase more ads because they can now see how close the competition is and what geographic markets they are focusing on.
“Ah-ha! – All their business is coming from Texas! – We should geo-target Texas with more adsâ€
Or…
“Oh-Crap! Now our competition knows that we have been focusing on Texas! – So much for staying under the radar.â€
June 20th, 2008 at 11:32 pm
This is why I won’t us GA on a money making site.
June 20th, 2008 at 11:36 pm
17. I don’t want my website listed. Is there a way to remove it from Trends for Websites?
No, the option to remove your website isn’t available at this time.
Isn’t that special?? Take data that many of us would rather keep private and show everyone.. Well, not Google’s data, but everyone else seems to be fair game..
June 20th, 2008 at 11:42 pm
@Jeremy Luebke: it has nothing to do with Google analytics, they display info for lots of sites that arent using GA
June 20th, 2008 at 11:52 pm
Google also isn’t showing their (recently acquired) Youtube.com , but do show its competitors.
And along those lines - what the heck happened to iFilm.com this past January? It dropped like a rock!
http://trends.google.com/websites?q=ifilm.com
June 20th, 2008 at 11:53 pm
…or blogger.com / blogspot.com …
June 21st, 2008 at 1:32 am
This is definitely a handy tool, but all your points are worthy too. Google shouldn’t play by this double standard.
June 21st, 2008 at 1:39 am
I think Google should appoint an ombudsman who can take up causes like this. They need such an officer for their own good. It’s clear that absolute power corrupts absolutely. Governments need to step in. The competition act is intended to stop predatory actions by companies that have quasi-monopolistic control of markets. By any definition the search market has achieved that status.
June 21st, 2008 at 2:06 am
I can’t wait until Google displays a pie chart that breaks down all of my referring traffic.
June 21st, 2008 at 3:10 am
I suppose this is confidential data !!
June 21st, 2008 at 4:13 am
Hey Michael, here’s the essence of what I said earlier about providing stats for some Google properties: I’ll pass on the feedback about providing metrics for Google sites. My personal guess is that given the brouhaha about Google metrics earlier this year (e.g. http://www.techcrunch.com/2008/04/21/why-comscores-google-paid-click-estimates-are-not-predictive-of-googles-revenues/ ), maybe the team wanted to start cautiously so that estimates on a Labs product wouldn’t be taken as hard truth or as some sort of forward-looking guidance. Again, that’s just my personal guess, but I’ll pass the feedback on, because I’d enjoy seeing stats on a few sites such as youtube.com myself.
“Google sees you as a commodity, like a piece of office furniture, or a herd of cattle, you exist for the purpose of Google to use however they see fit.”
I really have to disagree with this. Just a couple days ago Google had a massive webmaster chat. It was free, hundreds of people showed up to participate, and a bunch of Googlers answered questions live. You can listen to the MP3 or read all the Q&A at http://www.seroundtable.com/archives/017470.html and it’s a lot of information. And earlier today Google launched new APIs so that webmasters can manage their sites in Webmaster Central. The reason that we do things like this is to help webmasters, not to treat them like “a piece of office furniture.” I think resources like the offical Google webmaster blog provide a ton of helpful information, and a lot more information than other search engines.
June 21st, 2008 at 7:19 am
@Matt Cutts: Thanks for passing along the feedback, I understand things like this put you in an awkward spot.
It’s silly things like “17. I don’t want my website listed. Is there a way to remove it from Trends for Websites? No, the option to remove your website isn’t available at this time.” that just really make Google look bad. Opting out is technical hurdle? C’mon any comptent programmers knows that not a difficult piece of code to add people who registered at webmaster central.
I think @BarryWelford got it right Google really needs an ombudsman, they are too close and don’t see the viewpoint of web publishers. It starts with little things like automatically adding links to maps on pages. It becomes adversarial with things like Google Knols. When we reach this stage it’s just too far over the line. What’s good for you isn’t always good for us, and Google needs to recognize that.
There are a lot of smart people like yourself and others at Google who really care, there’s no need to aggravate the situation when adding an opt out could have prevented it.
June 21st, 2008 at 7:25 am
word! google are a bunch of hypocrites.
i wish google would just stop to exist …
June 21st, 2008 at 9:23 am
Yep, Google should display stats for their own properties…however, there could be an innocent explanation for this issue and I hope they come forward with it.
Should this be opt-out? I don’t see a reason why it should. Can you opt out of Alexa or Compete? I doubt it (though I admit I haven’t researched the topic). So long as your website is online, it’s going to be sliced and diced by many parties for rankings & statistics…and that’s just part of having a public website. I don’t see any real violation here.
June 21st, 2008 at 11:26 am
Michael, I take your point. If I try to step into the team’s shoes, I’m guessing that they’d point out that Compete/Alexa/whoever probably don’t have an opt-out. I will pass the feedback on though.
I think that a lot of Googlers do get the web publisher viewpoint because we’re webmasters too, with sites like mattcutts.com, brianwhite.org, bladam.com, johnmu.com, ex-Google vanessafoxnude.com, etc. I know a bunch more Googlers have websites but I won’t drag them into the spotlight.
But I do think we get a sense of what people are objecting to from reading all the different blogs that comment on Google.
June 21st, 2008 at 12:47 pm
I think don’t be evil has officially died
June 21st, 2008 at 2:23 pm
Surprise, nothing about gmail.com, froogle.com, orkut.com what so ever.
June 21st, 2008 at 3:08 pm
@Michael Gray I understand we get included without GA, but those stats would be alot more accurate if we where running GA.
June 21st, 2008 at 5:11 pm
I don’t rate anyway, because I’m not worthy, but you are totally right. THIS IS ABSOLUTE BULLSHIT!
Hey Matt: IRT your, “But I do think we get a sense of what people are objecting to from reading all the different blogs that comment on Google.”, I really don’t think you guys give a shit one way or the other.
Between you guys and technorati not claiming ANY of my blogs (or returning my emails asking why), you’r turning the internet into your own private property, and it fuckin sucks. To think clean code woulda meant something…
I’ll prolly never reach Wolf Man’s status, but here’s my 2c: http://billygirlardo.com/blog/is-google-one-of-your-people-being-invisible-and-background-processes/
At least you get replies Wolf Man, keep up the voice for the little guy. YOU’RE AWESOME!
June 21st, 2008 at 5:40 pm
Comparing this to Compete/Alexa stats is ludicrous.
Compete supplies a severely limited scope of keywords and Alexa, well even Matt Cutts said on his own blog their numbers are crap.
June 21st, 2008 at 8:44 pm
Matt,
If “the team wanted to start cautiously so that estimates on a Labs product wouldn’t be taken as hard truth or as some sort of forward-looking guidance.” Then why are Google owned properties the only businesses the team is worried about? Couldn’t providing Yahoo’s data have a similar effect? And yet, your team seems perfectly fine showing that data. Of course, that’s probably because you haven’t completely acquired them yet, they’re just whoring out their ads to you.
I’ll give you one thing, you do seem to genuinely care. But it’s amazing how out of touch Google has become. The time will soon come when even you, Matt, can’t put a sugary sweet spin on the BS that Google pulls.
June 21st, 2008 at 9:07 pm
@Matt Cutts I disagree with your reasoning. The Googlers you speak of operate personal sites and blogs. That is nothing like operating a business doing business on the web. If they did operate a business that depended on the internet for a large portion of it’s business, I guarantee you they would see it differently. I can only assume management at Google sees it the same way as Michael since they opted out.
Google is purposely becoming a major player in the competitive intelligence field. I’m not sure how all for the businesses that pay the light bills over at The Plex with Adwords is going to feel about that.
June 21st, 2008 at 11:40 pm
Ok, I do agree with Matt about ‘himself’ not treating webmasters like ‘office furniture’. I was at the live Webchat with Matt, Adam Lasnik & about a dozen other googlers who provided some insightful information and stayed over 30 minutes longer than scheduled to do so. Thanks for that.
However, if I was a Metacafe and wanted to hide my Alexa stats, I could robots.txt Alexa all day. So what. But it’s not like Metacafe can robots.txt out Google. I mean that’s a big ole difference.
BR
June 22nd, 2008 at 11:29 pm
Will Firefox 3 usage data get thrown in the mix too?
“How does Firefox 3 recognize a “web site that is known to install malware” or a “page that’s suspected of being a forgery”?
Johnathan Nightingale: For Firefox 3, we have an agreement in place with Google to use their phishing and malware databases.”
I know this may be stretching it, but my firewall log shows hundreds of visits to Google today and I have not been on Goooogle once today.
No toolbar either.
WTF?
June 23rd, 2008 at 2:02 am
dann404, the last time I checked Firefox 3 would download the list of malware sites periodically, rather than sending urls to Google. So I don’t believe that Firefox 3 sends any such data to Google out-of-the-box.
June 23rd, 2008 at 1:48 pm
Michael,
Disagree on this one and I think Matt Cutts is also wrong. I think it is a matter of tracking users that come to Google and go somewhere else. Are people going to come to google to then search for ‘google’? One could argue that they should release the data for the number of visitors they have to Google but that’s a different stat. All Google Trends is releasing is the traffic from Google to another site. Thus, if they were to do that about Google it would only show the number of Google users that then go to a Google site. That may be wildly misleading because only a small subset of people would go to Google from Google. We can all check our G’Analytics, Omniture, or other tracking systems to see that the numbers they state are truly just the Google inbound traffic numbers not our actual traffic numbers.
Did I make any sense?
Brent D. Payne
June 23rd, 2008 at 2:22 pm
Michael, VERY good post. You do have a very valid point. I am really getting sick and tired of Google’s double standards too.
Matt, I know its not your idea to set up Trends like this but you should really go and kick some serious butt because this is hurting Googles reputation dramatically. Tell your colleagues to stop being such idiots. Teach them how to be nicer - I know you know how to do this
We have made a Google voodo doll that we will torture at the Strikpoint show today - tune in and listen to the whining doll!
June 23rd, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Thanks Matt for easing my paranoia.
June 23rd, 2008 at 4:56 pm
I must say, that i very much agree with Michael here. Lets hope that Matt will pass the feedback to the right people, so we can track Google sites as well.
June 23rd, 2008 at 5:47 pm
Google needs to be splitted. I support government intervention.
June 24th, 2008 at 7:03 am
@Matt -
“maybe the team wanted to start cautiously so that estimates on a Labs product wouldn’t be taken as hard truth or as some sort of forward-looking guidance.”
If the team was so worried about people taking Google information as hard truth (possibly affecting stock price, .etc) then why are they not worried about releasing competitor data?
“I think resources like the official Google webmaster blog provide a ton of helpful information, and a lot more information than other search engines.”
The fact is Google needs websites to be crawlable in order for their SERPS to deliver the best results. If all webmasters decided to build their sites in Flash or JavaScript, what will the SERPs look like? How well will Google do?
BUT as we all know webmaster want to rank so they follow Google guidelines and they implement SEO tactics to gain rankings. And Google has you to communicate tidbits of information so webmasters can tweak their websites, BUT you do not give out all information because you do not want webmasters to be in control. SO it is a two way street.
BTW, nice interview on USAToday (http://www.usatoday.com/tech/products/services/2008-06-22-google-search-engine-optimization_N.htm). Google does benefit by going to mainstream media and getting the word out about optimizing a website, it helps Google algorithm deliver the best SERPS.
June 24th, 2008 at 7:10 am
@Brent: Google doens’t only use his search results, “..data is estimated and aggregated over a variety of sources..”. And I do think they use metrics (and external sources) to calculate the information that isn’t availible for them. But I agree they should be clear about what they use and were we have a choise to contribute or not.
For Google Analytics Data Sharing, that is an option what you have to turn on and I’m seriously hoping Google stays clear about this.
June 24th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Interestingly enough, mattcutts.com also does not show.
Matt, any explanation for this?
June 24th, 2008 at 4:32 pm
Hehe, whenever I read that famous name so many times in a row I start thinking of hiphop and a DJ called ‘Mad Cutz’
June 26th, 2008 at 10:30 pm
Agreed with:
http://www.wolf-howl.com/google/googles-two-tiered-world/#comment-62567
June 27th, 2008 at 3:46 pm
I would have to agree. Why do google feel like they can give out so much information, and then hide there own data. When it isn’t something you have to enable, I at least would want the possibilty to diabled my data getting puplished.
July 1st, 2008 at 2:31 pm
Ummm… they sold out when they cut their big-brother deal with the Chinese. Don’t do evil?! Too late.