• http://www.boom-online.co.uk IanLockwood

    Great write-up, thanks Danny. Agreed with regards to removing referrer data – absolutely no way does Search Plus justify removal, a technical solution would be simple if that were the case. If Google can identify a particular entry in the results as being “personal”, it can just as easily remove referrer data for only such “personal” links whilst retaining it for public results.

  • S.P.

    Presumably this means that those of us hoping to get our websites onto the first page of organic search results will be pushed further down? I’m looking for a tall building to jump off – things are bad enough already.

  • http://www.linkedin.com/in/mikegracen Mike Gracen

    Excellent write-up. Unfortunately, without including information from social site’s people actually use (FB, Twitter, Flickr), this is just another yawn inducing move by Google IMO. They have some of the brightest minds in the world, yet they can’t seem to come up with anything new that is mind-blowing. I just don’t get it..

  • http://www.modani.com Rafael Montilla

    A few years ago, I read Google had applied to build a private internet, It was denied by the congress, but with this “Search Plus Your World”, for me It is a private “Google World” they control everything, it remind me the movie “The Truman Show” by Jim Carrey. When we login into Google, we will become Truman living a “Google World”

  • http://europeforvisitors.com Durant Imboden

    The “turn off personalization” button is a great addition–and a necessary one, given the amount of clutter that’s being added to Google’s already cluttered “universal search.”

    What I’d really like to see is a page with checkboxes that would let me activate or deactivate specific search features (Web, news, images, video, Google+, or whatever) in my default search results. After all, I might like some personalization features while being annoyed or distracted by others.

  • http://inpromtu.de Klaus Michael Bredt

    “See how a search for New York Times used to bring up a link directly to the New York Times within the search box? That seems to have quietly disappeared.”

    They are still doing this: http://imgur.com/s5iMm

  • Chas

    Google Plus Google’s World- fortunately, there is a bigger internet beyond Google and Facebook- there are other search engines and social networking sites; I choose the opt-out button for both BigG and FB.

  • http://www.mankabros.com/blogs/onmedea Jill Kennedy

    They can do all they want to try and tap into that social media element but it’s never going to work. Social Networks are dead. It’s just a matter of time.


  • http://www.seochemist.com Oli

    I would like Google to remember that if I am using a search engine, I am probably looking for something new. I don’t think this is a good move.

  • http://www.hyperdogmedia.com/blog/ Jim Kreinbrink

    Just realized: If I’m choosing a dentist, the last thing I’ll want is to come back to the reception area and see people I know. Maybe I’ll choose the one with the LEAST social signals!

  • http://www.twitter.com/iashishpsingh Ashish Pratap Singh

    Wonderful effort to promote G+. What can i say else?

  • http://asimpledropofwater.blogspot.com/ Karthik Sivasubramaniam

    Thanks for the detailed insight, Danny. The first time I saw this result on my PC I thought, “I have never seen this blunt an effort from Google to advertise Google+”. And Google reinforces my thought by its last link in the people results “See how you could appear here too”. Outrageous.

    And, isn’t Google growingly presuming every user IS looking for personalized results ALWAYS? I mean, I’m not the one who says what I expect.

    I’m not a Google critic. In fact, I’m a fan of it for many of its endeavors. But this is what I honestly think: Google should learn to prevent its ‘social’ insecurity affecting its search.

  • http://www.saikatbose.com Saikat Bose

    Seems like Matt Cutts is at firefighting again. After receiving some flak from the online community, Matt posted this on his blog.

  • http://www.ecomm-unity.com Daniel

    well i already see some bugs on the system such the “extended circles” on plus. how is this data analysed?
    overall looks like a nice attempt from the google boys to sort the social media, hash tags will become more prominent for sure, and hopefully regular users will get use to searching also for public well valued content. otherwise is the connection junkie era.

  • Bill Roy

    Just one of the ‘many’ reasons I now don’t use GO’D’gle, like many others.

  • http://webdesignfromscratch.com/ Ben Hunt

    Google has the right strategy, but all that power brings the risk of becoming the next Microsoft.

    This post explores what the convergence of social and search (and more) means to the average web user: http://www.webdesignfromscratch.com/blog/google-search-plus-your-world-what-it-really-means/

  • Mohit Garg

    Now this scares me, my private data in search result

  • http://www.meckwebs.com Mark Hansen

    So… where are all the Google Engineers and Tech Bloggers who are trippng over themselves to close their Google+ accounts today due to the instant personalization features? (didn’t this happen to Facebook when they intro’d similar features?)


    Pot – Kettle – Black… Should be interesting to watch the tech world (rightfully) lose it today, and have a massive purge of Google+ accounts in protest.

  • http://www.pageonebusiness.com Warner Carter

    I was wondering how this might effect SEO so asked this on Quora: http://www.quora.com/Will-Search-Plus-Your-World-change-SEO-and-if-so-how maybe you have a comment?

  • http://imateski.blogspot.com/ Igor Mateski

    This was a very informative read. Thanks for spending the time and energy to share it on Facebook too. From a simplistic perspective of counting heads that click buttons in order to prevent social spam, I think Google+ is a God-sent. With all the previous updates in 2011, “the year that Google and Bing took away from SEO”, it seems Google is making changes so ranking algos boost sites that focus on quality content and good relationship with customers, and G+ is spot on. I also read your post over at Marketing Land, and decided to write up my view of the Google+ issue, but from a bit different perspective, would love to hear your thoughts http://searchengineland.com/2011-year-google-bing-took-away-from-seos-publishers-106311

  • http://imateski.blogspot.com/ Igor Mateski
  • http://www.danmozgai.com/ Dan Mozgai

    Time to update the importance of social in the Periodic Table of SEO Ranking Factors http://searchengineland.com/seotable/

  • http://socialprseo.com Matthew D. Wright

    I feel silly and lazy asking this but is Google+ crawlable by Bing, Yahoo, Facebook, Twitter, Blekko e.t.c? If it is then CTO’s need to “join on” Google+ and innovate. It’s about time more people pushed Google!

  • http://alzodigital.com S.C.

    Maybe I missed something and it has already been pointed out, but when you search at http://www.google.com, logged in to your Google account, you don’t get the Google+ Your World results; you have to search at https://google.com in order to get it (i.e. for the plus your world button to show). The non-inclusion of the + your world results only happens when I start a query from my customized iGoogle desktop. Any thoughts on this?

  • http://cxinteractive.com Christian Neeser

    Thanks Danny for the detailed article. These recent developments continue to change the way SEO’s need to approach search marketing. I feel like our job as SEO’s got a lot more complex . I don’t befriend my clients on facebook. However, getting Google + connected with your clients and prospects seems like a very good thing to be doing at this stage.

  • http://www.localsearchtraffic.com Anne Baum

    Thank you for your article. I agree as advertisers we need to understand and incorporate the release of search plus your world into our paid, seo, and geosocial strategies now and moving forward. However, from an everyday user prespective, the impact on search experience is probably not as noticable as we think considering someone has to have a google account and then upgrade to a google + account and be signed in when searching on their phone, tablet or computer. Most google products except search still are second, third, etc. behind their competition. I’m looking forward to updating our strategies to consider the end result for both g + and non-g+ users.

  • A.W.

    thanks Danny, I think the alarm bells have been ringing for a while in terms of relevance of search results and Google favouring itself. When click-thru-rates for some search terms are averaging over 20%, that is a pretty damning indictment on the relevance of organic content on the page. If organic search relevance was a focus, surely CTR would have been trending down since the intro of Google Places and not upwards.

    Now Google has come up with a another way to charge you for the fact that the organic results as poor. Dynamic Search Ads (in beta). This one looks like a very slippery slope for Google.

    Surely if it is using the same ‘organic web crawling’ technology as it says, to deliver a relevant ad, then why isn’t there a relevant organic SERP and if the Dynamic search ad is successful, doesn’t that justify a ranking improvement for the same item in the Organics?

    Your thoughts?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Submitway-Sakthi/100003666511814 Submitway Sakthi

    Thanks for the tips.

    Really great tips. Thanks for sharing us that informations. 

    Don`t stop this good reports! Really a good, like it.

    Many thanks.

  • http://www.facebook.com/southamericaliv Molly McHugh

    Probably a dumb question but my picture (Google+) that was appearing for all search results with my site now just shows the graphic you have at top of page – generic person shape.  What happened?  I was logged-in to my gmail like always and now notice my photo doesn’t display with my pages anymore?  Appreciate any feedback/help.