I've blogged before about my frustration with the hysteria that often accompanies SEO-related “news,” with so-called experts declaring that every bit of information is of a seismic nature and that life as we know it no longer exists.
Maybe it’s because I’m getting too old or cynical, but it’s very rare for me to raise an eyebrow while reading digital marketing news, but I cringed when Rand Fishkin, a digital legend (at least in the SEO world!), announced a few weeks ago that he’d been involved in a pretty large-scale leak of Google Search API documentation.
The announcement was nothing more than the usual hyperbole, with Rand claiming:A breach of this magnitude and detail has never been reported from Google's search division in the last quarter century.“He announced the leak in a blog post on May 27, but was informed of the document's existence by Erfan Azimi on May 5. The document was actually published on Github on March 27, but was removed on May 7.”
I've been reading the leaked documents for a while now. I won't say I've read all the details, it would take time. But I haven't been keen to jump on the bandwagon because I don't believe it will change anything about how we as an agency approach search engine marketing. Everything I've read so far has supported the way Browser Media approaches SEO and I'm confident we're doing it right.
what teeth But what is interesting to me are two key findings.
- The leaked documents directly contradict many public statements that the search engine's PR team has made over the years. I'm not surprised because in the 20 years since the browser medium began its existence, the evidence I've seen with my own eyes has often suggested that the opposite of what Google is saying is true. I expect any future announcements from Google to be met with a certain degree of skepticism. I doubt Google will really care because it doesn't really affect users, but I suspect smarter digital marketers will stop hanging on to every word the Google oracle utters.
- Google has political bias. I am not surprised at all, but it is pretty reprehensible to see evidence that whitelisted sites are given priority over sites that present views different from what the Google Gods want. This also applies to election-related content (eh, so Google doesn't really respect democracy, does it?). But the manipulation of search results was very strong even in the dire situation of the COVID pandemic. Search results were tightly controlled and any voices questioning the official narrative were suppressed. I don't think this is Orwellian control over “truth”, but it feels very “Big Brother” and I am concerned that such actions will do considerable damage to the trust users have in Google's search results pages. Combined with the PR team's brazen lies about what data is and isn't used in the search algorithm, I think many digital marketers will be angry at Google. But in reality, I am sure most users will not know about the leak, so I don't expect the search giant to fall anytime soon.
While I don't think it will hurt the search engine's popularity among the general public, it will only increase the frustration many digital marketers have with Google. While it's not as annoying as GA4, the obvious disrespect shown to the SEO community leaves a bad taste in the mouth and will undoubtedly have a negative impact on future SEO announcements.
What does the leaked information mean for your SEO strategy?
The answer to this question depends entirely on your current SEO strategy 🙂
From Browser Media's perspective, we don't believe this leak has called into question our approach to SEO. As I alluded to above, I often feel that most of Google's public PR pronouncements can be ignored. While I fully support Google's overarching mantra of focusing on the needs and interests of your target users, we often see evidence of the success of certain tactics that Google has officially declared obsolete.
I believe the importance of (high quality) link building is probably the biggest one, as we are repeatedly told that links don’t matter anymore, but I was personally interested to read about “NavBoost”, which looks at user behavior on the SERPs and then on the sites they click to.
This is a bit of a personal opinion, but I've often been challenged for recommending improved meta descriptions because they're not a ranking factor. The accusation is that this is an old SEO obsession that's no longer relevant in the modern world. While I've always agreed that meta descriptions aren't a direct ranking factor, I've seen so many examples of search rankings improving after work on refining meta descriptions that I've always been convinced that working to improve click-through rates will improve visibility. While I'll admit that Google's very frustrating habit of not actually using meta descriptions as text snippets undermines their importance, I'm pleased to see that the leaked API documentation backs up what I've been seeing in practice.
Reading a lot about search APIs has helped me sleep better, and not just because it's getting boring fast. more We were convinced that a digital PR strategy focused on great content, both on-site and off-site, and amplifying that content, was the right strategy for long-term SEO success. I've seen this work in a variety of areas, and all of the API documentation confirms what we've felt for years. While it doesn't necessarily line up with what Google is saying publicly, it was reassuring to see evidence from the ground up that we're on the right track.
It often feels like people are looking for SEO shortcuts. This is why there's such an obsession with SEO news – because people are hoping it's the key that will unlock the lazy hacks to SEO success. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but there really is no secret to good SEO. It's just a lot of hard work.
In short, I personally don’t agree with Rand Fishkin that this breach is the biggest news story of the last 25 years. If this is brand new news to you, you’re probably doing your SEO wrong.