One theme that I've been concerned with this week centers around data transparency in the search engine world. Search engines provide information that is critical to the business of optimizing and growing a business on the web, yet barriers to this data currently force many companies to use methods of data extraction that violate the search engines' terms of service.
Specifically, we're talking about two pieces of information that no large-scale, successful web operation should be without. These include rankings (the position of their site(s) vs. their competitors) for important keywords and link data (currently provided most accurately through Yahoo!, but also available through MSN and in lower quality formats from Google).
Why do marketers and businesses need this data so badly? First we'll look at rankings:
• For large sites in particular, rankings across the board will go up or down based on their actions and the actions of their competition. Any serious company who fails to monitor tweaks to their site, public relations, press and optimization tactics in this way will lose out to competitors who do track this data and, thus, can make intelligent business decisions based on it.
• Rankings provide a benchmark that helps companies estimate their global reach in the search results and make predictions about whether certain areas of extension or growth make logical sense. If a company must decide on how to expand their content or what new keywords to target or even if they can compete in new markets, the business intelligence that can be extracted from large swaths of ranking data is critical.
• Rankings can be mapped directly to traffic, allowing companies to consider advertising, extending their reach or forming partnerships
And, on the link data side:
• Temporal link information allows marketers to see what effects certain link building, public relations and press efforts have on a site's link profile. Although some of this data is available through referring links in analytics programs, many folks are much more interested in the links that search engines know about and count, which often includes many more than those that pass traffic (and also ignores/doesn't count some that do pass traffic).
• Link data may provide references for reputation management or tracking of viral campaigns - again, items that analytics don't entirely encompass.
• Competitive link data may be of critical importance to many marketers - this information can't be tracked any other way.
I admit it. SEOmoz is a search engine scraper - we do it for our free public tools, for our internal research and we've even considered doing it for clients (though I'm seriously concerned about charging for data that's obtained outside TOS). Many hundreds of large firms in the search space (including a few that are 10-20X our size) do it, too. Why? Because search engine APIs aren't accurate.
Let's look at each engine's abilities and data sources individually. Since we've got a few hundred thousand points of data (if not more) on each, we're in a good position to make calls about how these systems are working.
Google (all APIs listed here):
• Search SOAP API - provides ranking results that are massively different from almost every datacenter. The information is often less than useless, it's actually harmful, since you'll get a false sense of what's happening with your positions.
• AJAX Search API - This is really designed to be integrated with your website, and the results can be of good quality for that purpose, but it really doesn't serve the job of providing good stats reporting.
• AdSense & AdWords APIs - In all honesty, we haven't played around with these, but the fact that neither will report the correct order of the ads, nor will they show more than 8 ads at a time tells me that if a marketer needed this type of data, the APIs wouldn't work.
Yahoo! (APIs listed here):
• Search API - Provides ranking information that is a somewhat accurate map to Yahoo!'s actual rankings, but is occassionally so far off-base that they're not reliable. Our data points show a lot more congruity with Yahoo!'s than Google's, but not nearly enough when compared with scraped results to be valuable to marketers and businesses.
• Site Explorer API - Shows excellent information as far as number of pages indexed on a site and the link data that Yahoo! knows about. We've been comparing this information with that from scraped Yahoo! search results (for queries like linkdomain: and site:) and those at the Site Explorer page and find that there's very little quality difference in the results returned, though the best estimate numbers can still be found through a last page search of results.
• Search Marketing API - I haven't played with this one at all, so I'd love to hear comments from those who have.
MSN:
• Doesn't mind scraping as long as you use the RSS results. We do, we love them and we commend MSN for giving them out - bravo! They've also got a web search SDK program, but we've yet to give it a whirl. The only problem is the MSN estimates, which are so far off as to be useless. The links themselves, though, are useful.
Ask.com
• Though it's somewhat hidden, the XML.Teoma.com page allows for scraping of results and Ask doesn't seem to mind, though they haven't explicitly said anything. Again, bravo! - the results look solid, accurate and match up against the Ask.com queries. Now, if Ask would only provide links
I know a lot of you are probably asking:
• "Rand, if scraping is working, why do you care about the search engines fixing the APIs?"
• The straight answer is that scraping hurts the search engines, hurts their users and isn't the most practical way to get the data. Let me give you some examples:
• Scraped queries have to look as much like real users as possible to avoid detection and banning - thus, they affect the query data that search engineers use to improve web search.
• These queries also hit advertisers - falsifying the number of "real" impressions that advertisers see and lowering their CTRs unnaturally.
• They take up search engine resources and though even the heaviest scraping barely impacts their server loads, it's still an annoyance.
• With all these negative elements, and so many positive incentives to have the data, it's clear what's needed - a way for marketers/businesses to get the data they need without hurting the search engines. Here's how they can do it:
• Provide the search ranking position of a site in the referral string - this works for ranking data, but not for link data and since Yahoo! (and Google) both send referrals through re-directs at times, it wouldn't be a hard piece to add.
• Make the API's accurate, complete and unlimited
• If the last option is too ambitious, the search engines could charge for API queries - anyone who needs the data would be more than happy to pay for it. This might help with quality control, too.
• For link data - serve up accurate, wholistic data in programs like Google Sitemaps and Yahoo! Search Submit (or even, Google Analytics). Obviously, you'd only get information about your own site after verifying.
I've talked to lots of people at the search engine level about making changes this week (including Jeremy, Priyank, Matt, Adam, Aaron, Brett and more). I can only hope for the best...
Source: http://moz.com/blog/the-nasty-problem-with-scraping-results-from-the-engines
Specifically, we're talking about two pieces of information that no large-scale, successful web operation should be without. These include rankings (the position of their site(s) vs. their competitors) for important keywords and link data (currently provided most accurately through Yahoo!, but also available through MSN and in lower quality formats from Google).
Why do marketers and businesses need this data so badly? First we'll look at rankings:
• For large sites in particular, rankings across the board will go up or down based on their actions and the actions of their competition. Any serious company who fails to monitor tweaks to their site, public relations, press and optimization tactics in this way will lose out to competitors who do track this data and, thus, can make intelligent business decisions based on it.
• Rankings provide a benchmark that helps companies estimate their global reach in the search results and make predictions about whether certain areas of extension or growth make logical sense. If a company must decide on how to expand their content or what new keywords to target or even if they can compete in new markets, the business intelligence that can be extracted from large swaths of ranking data is critical.
• Rankings can be mapped directly to traffic, allowing companies to consider advertising, extending their reach or forming partnerships
And, on the link data side:
• Temporal link information allows marketers to see what effects certain link building, public relations and press efforts have on a site's link profile. Although some of this data is available through referring links in analytics programs, many folks are much more interested in the links that search engines know about and count, which often includes many more than those that pass traffic (and also ignores/doesn't count some that do pass traffic).
• Link data may provide references for reputation management or tracking of viral campaigns - again, items that analytics don't entirely encompass.
• Competitive link data may be of critical importance to many marketers - this information can't be tracked any other way.
I admit it. SEOmoz is a search engine scraper - we do it for our free public tools, for our internal research and we've even considered doing it for clients (though I'm seriously concerned about charging for data that's obtained outside TOS). Many hundreds of large firms in the search space (including a few that are 10-20X our size) do it, too. Why? Because search engine APIs aren't accurate.
Let's look at each engine's abilities and data sources individually. Since we've got a few hundred thousand points of data (if not more) on each, we're in a good position to make calls about how these systems are working.
Google (all APIs listed here):
• Search SOAP API - provides ranking results that are massively different from almost every datacenter. The information is often less than useless, it's actually harmful, since you'll get a false sense of what's happening with your positions.
• AJAX Search API - This is really designed to be integrated with your website, and the results can be of good quality for that purpose, but it really doesn't serve the job of providing good stats reporting.
• AdSense & AdWords APIs - In all honesty, we haven't played around with these, but the fact that neither will report the correct order of the ads, nor will they show more than 8 ads at a time tells me that if a marketer needed this type of data, the APIs wouldn't work.
Yahoo! (APIs listed here):
• Search API - Provides ranking information that is a somewhat accurate map to Yahoo!'s actual rankings, but is occassionally so far off-base that they're not reliable. Our data points show a lot more congruity with Yahoo!'s than Google's, but not nearly enough when compared with scraped results to be valuable to marketers and businesses.
• Site Explorer API - Shows excellent information as far as number of pages indexed on a site and the link data that Yahoo! knows about. We've been comparing this information with that from scraped Yahoo! search results (for queries like linkdomain: and site:) and those at the Site Explorer page and find that there's very little quality difference in the results returned, though the best estimate numbers can still be found through a last page search of results.
• Search Marketing API - I haven't played with this one at all, so I'd love to hear comments from those who have.
MSN:
• Doesn't mind scraping as long as you use the RSS results. We do, we love them and we commend MSN for giving them out - bravo! They've also got a web search SDK program, but we've yet to give it a whirl. The only problem is the MSN estimates, which are so far off as to be useless. The links themselves, though, are useful.
Ask.com
• Though it's somewhat hidden, the XML.Teoma.com page allows for scraping of results and Ask doesn't seem to mind, though they haven't explicitly said anything. Again, bravo! - the results look solid, accurate and match up against the Ask.com queries. Now, if Ask would only provide links
I know a lot of you are probably asking:
• "Rand, if scraping is working, why do you care about the search engines fixing the APIs?"
• The straight answer is that scraping hurts the search engines, hurts their users and isn't the most practical way to get the data. Let me give you some examples:
• Scraped queries have to look as much like real users as possible to avoid detection and banning - thus, they affect the query data that search engineers use to improve web search.
• These queries also hit advertisers - falsifying the number of "real" impressions that advertisers see and lowering their CTRs unnaturally.
• They take up search engine resources and though even the heaviest scraping barely impacts their server loads, it's still an annoyance.
• With all these negative elements, and so many positive incentives to have the data, it's clear what's needed - a way for marketers/businesses to get the data they need without hurting the search engines. Here's how they can do it:
• Provide the search ranking position of a site in the referral string - this works for ranking data, but not for link data and since Yahoo! (and Google) both send referrals through re-directs at times, it wouldn't be a hard piece to add.
• Make the API's accurate, complete and unlimited
• If the last option is too ambitious, the search engines could charge for API queries - anyone who needs the data would be more than happy to pay for it. This might help with quality control, too.
• For link data - serve up accurate, wholistic data in programs like Google Sitemaps and Yahoo! Search Submit (or even, Google Analytics). Obviously, you'd only get information about your own site after verifying.
I've talked to lots of people at the search engine level about making changes this week (including Jeremy, Priyank, Matt, Adam, Aaron, Brett and more). I can only hope for the best...
Source: http://moz.com/blog/the-nasty-problem-with-scraping-results-from-the-engines
No comments:
Post a Comment