Starting From Search

I Now Call Google to the Witness Stand

In Florida, there is an interesting legal case unfolding. The defendant is accused of purveying obscene material from a web site, but the definition of obscenity is based on community standards. As a way to poke holes in this, the defense wants to show that "the community" is actually a lot less moral than they say they are.

How are they going to show this? By using search traffic data from Google. Essentially, the defense is going to try to point out that people will claim to be more moral than they actually are, but in the privacy of our own homes (based on what types of searches people typically perform at their computers) morality is more ambiguous. After all, based on this chart at Google Trends, it appears that Florida’s appetite for porn has increased steadily since 2004.

But search data is not that easy to parse because the search traffic does not get to the underlying intent of the searcher. Just because someone does a search on porn, does that mean that person was actually looking for pictures? We can guess, but we'll never know for sure.

Slate.com has the full story on the case, and the role of the internet in the definition of "community."

Rumor's of Google's Death have been Greatly Exaggerated

Inside the industry, there have been rumors floating around for the last 6 months or so that Google is having trouble retaining people. Fortune even had a piece on the brain drain that is allegedly taking place.

Today, Slate.com has a great piece exploring the validity of the rumors. It's worthy of a read.

What Search Engines Can Tell Us about Us

I wanted to get back in touch with a friend that I haven't seen in about 3 years. In college we were close, but lost touch when life got busy. We both got married, had kids, etc. So I decided to Google him, hoping to turn up his phone number via a phone book entry.

The very first result told me that he was caught and convicted of a significant crime.

With just a few searches on Google and Yahoo, I learned that he was arrested about 18-months ago. I learned exactly which law he broke, how much time he served, where he served it. Obviously, I was concerned about his family. With a few more searches I was able to learn that he and his wife recently purchased a home in a suburb, indicating they must still be together.

With a few searches I was taken right into the darkest part of his life.

Search is clearly more than just a bridge between keywords and web sites. It is having a cultural impact. How large that impact will be won’t be known for many years. They are becoming an alethiometer of sorts, begging the question: are we really ready to have the answer to every question we seek?

Google is now indexing public government records. In the near future it’s possible someone could do a search on you, and uncover, for example, your divorce records. Is that the first thing you would want someone to know about you?

By the way, I did get his new address and phone number. I'm not sure if I should contact him or not. Google told me his story. I’m wrestling with the question: do I let him tell me his story, or is Google's version enough? Search engines may well now be able provide us information at a rate well beyond our human conditions ability to deal with.

Newsweek Article on Search Privacy

As a follow up to my last post, Newsweek has an article on the same topic. Link -- Newsweek: Will You Let Them Store Your Dreams?

Interesting snip:

In the AOL case, the records were supposedly anonymous, but since people commonly type in their own names and addresses into search engines, it's often trivial to identify who is searching. Indeed, The New York Times was able to deduce the identity of a 62-year-old widow in Georgia who researched Italian vacations, termites and hand tremors.

Worried about Search Engine Privacy? TrackMeNot

With the accidental release of the search queries of 658,000 anonymous AOL users onto the web, people have begun to ask questions about their own privacy. While the search records were considered anonymous because they were identified only by number, several sources, including the NYTimes, were able to track down some of the actual people behind the search data.

A person does not have to be very paranoid to wonder if searches could come back to haunt them. The US government has requested search data in the past. How long before search histories are subpoenaed for a divorce proceeding?

It's actually the harmless searches that are more revealing. If I search on fear of flying therapy, it should be my choice on who I share that with, not AOLs (or Google’s, or Yahoo’s, etc.) There shouldn’t be a database of my fears out there somewhere.

That's where TrackMeNot comes in. It's a Firefox extension that pulls random word combinations from a list of words and submits them as searches, essentially, diluting whatever cookies and log files may be stored on your searches.

While I think this technology is interesting (and actually kind of funny), there is a downside. I'm concerned how a search randomization extension could ruin keyword research.

Keyword research is an extremely effective tool to uncovering what people are actually typing into engines when they are searching for products in your industry. If I have to start wondering if keyword combinations and traffic estimations are truly accurate, then the advice I give my clients could be compromised.

I think it's an interesting idea to solve the problem — dilute the log files so much that they are worthless. But couldn’t this problem be solved in a much more effective way? Oh, like, the engines realizing there is a privacy concern and not keeping log files for longer than a few days?

I would hope they draw that conclusion before someone starts a class action lawsuit to make it happen.