<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Can we trust Google's data?</title>
		<description>Discuss Can we trust Google's data?</description>
		<link>http://searchnewscentral.com/2010102065/Analytics/can-we-trust-googles-data.html</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 22:02:03 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://searchnewscentral.com/feed/com_content/65/Page-1.html" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>SerialsUp says:</title>
			<link>http://searchnewscentral.com/2010102065/Analytics/can-we-trust-googles-data.html#comment-731</link>
			<description><![CDATA[conscience led me here. As many of you know, I was once a Calvary Chapel Pastor and missionary, but it slowly stopped making sense. I do have reasons for this, but that is not what I am writing about now. I was taught to believe that people like me became this way because of a gross sin, or because they loved the world more than they loved God. I now know this to be a lie. I am really not much different morally than I was then, nor do I wish to pursue things that would harm myself or others. Ironically, to be quite honest, I think I’m a bit more moral than I was then. I am most definately way more honest.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>SerialsUp</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 23 Aug 2011 12:21:35 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://searchnewscentral.com/2010102065/Analytics/can-we-trust-googles-data.html#comment-731</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>SerialsUp says:</title>
			<link>http://searchnewscentral.com/2010102065/Analytics/can-we-trust-googles-data.html#comment-730</link>
			<description><![CDATA[It's time to make some big decisions, so the Google guys are slipping on their white lab coats. After eight years in the spotlight running a company that Wall Street values at more than $100 billion, Google co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page are still just in their early 30s and, with the stubbornness of youth, perhaps, and the aura of invincibility, keep doing things their way. So the white coats go on when it's time to approve new products. For a few hours, teams of engineers will come forward with their best ideas, hoping to dazzle the most powerful men in Silicon Valley. Google paid crazy money to attract top talent--supercharging the nerd market in the process--and this is the recruits' chance to show the investments were worth it.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>SerialsUp</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 21 Aug 2011 07:27:12 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://searchnewscentral.com/2010102065/Analytics/can-we-trust-googles-data.html#comment-730</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Asian Tv says:</title>
			<link>http://searchnewscentral.com/2010102065/Analytics/can-we-trust-googles-data.html#comment-553</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I think the important question here is did Google know that extra data was in the content being captured? As a developer who has in the past for many many years reverse engineered file formats and represented them in an entirely different 'common' format I find it very difficult to believe that this data existed and was being produced undetected late in the development stage or was missed in the testing stage. Given that Google was collecting enormous amounts of data with their street cars it would be intuitive to suggest that this data was looked at prior to application release and was tweaked to ensure that it was presented to the hard disk while capturing, with the most economical storage method available in mind. It would be foolish and incomprehensibl e to suggest that Google allowed the saved file format to contain 'bloated' raw data containing this extra 'unwanted' data that nobody knew about and was ignored. If I went about mapping an entire country, I would ensure that the data collection process was lean and mean for the purpose intended with no unwanted 'side affects' taking up valuable disk space. Anything other than lean and mean would be a gross error on my part.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Asian Tv</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sat, 21 May 2011 07:51:37 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://searchnewscentral.com/2010102065/Analytics/can-we-trust-googles-data.html#comment-553</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>DownHuntTvForum says:</title>
			<link>http://searchnewscentral.com/2010102065/Analytics/can-we-trust-googles-data.html#comment-537</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Your Post is very useful, I am truly happy to post my note on this blog . It helped me with ocean of awareness so I really consider you will do much better in the future.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>DownHuntTvForum</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 06 May 2011 15:16:11 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://searchnewscentral.com/2010102065/Analytics/can-we-trust-googles-data.html#comment-537</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>UHU Tv Forum says:</title>
			<link>http://searchnewscentral.com/2010102065/Analytics/can-we-trust-googles-data.html#comment-534</link>
			<description><![CDATA[f you ask me why pay more for cordless drills if on the market there’s a great range of cheaper plug-in drills my answer will be simple – it’s freedom. I’m sure that everyone was in a situation when you had to do some fixing in rather odd places. There’s always something to do in the backyard, everything can happen with your car somewhere on a lonely driveway. Of course, you don’t expect an outlet be available there. So cordless drill comes to relief. All modern cordless drill kits come with a drill itself, a charger and at least one battery.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>UHU Tv Forum</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Tue, 03 May 2011 22:02:19 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://searchnewscentral.com/2010102065/Analytics/can-we-trust-googles-data.html#comment-534</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Meratvforum says:</title>
			<link>http://searchnewscentral.com/2010102065/Analytics/can-we-trust-googles-data.html#comment-466</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I think the important question here is did Google know that extra data was in the content being captured? As a developer who has in the past for many many years reverse engineered file formats and represented them in an entirely different 'common' format I find it very difficult to believe that this data existed and was being produced undetected late in the development stage or was missed in the testing stage. Given that Google was collecting enormous amounts of data with their street cars it would be intuitive to suggest that this data was looked at prior to application release and was tweaked to ensure that it was presented to the hard disk while capturing, with the most economical storage method available in mind. It would be foolish and incomprehensibl e to suggest that Google allowed the saved file format to contain 'bloated' raw data containing this extra 'unwanted' data that nobody knew about and was ignored. If I went about mapping an entire country, I would ensure that the data collection process was lean and mean for the purpose intended with no unwanted 'side affects' taking up valuable disk space. Anything other than lean and mean would be a gross error on my part.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Meratvforum</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Mon, 21 Mar 2011 03:27:02 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://searchnewscentral.com/2010102065/Analytics/can-we-trust-googles-data.html#comment-466</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>MrSmith says:</title>
			<link>http://searchnewscentral.com/2010102065/Analytics/can-we-trust-googles-data.html#comment-361</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Agreeing with the general consensus here. I don't trust google for anything, other than looking out for googles best interests. Noticed so many sleazy practices they pull. As I've been trying to learn SEM/PCC. Which of course it's not just google ... All the megatech corps seem needlessly sleazy in the way they conduct themselves. Like they want to get every last nickle they can, by screwing people over. Don't know how that's a formula for success or long term mutual benefit ... Just the reality though. Any data google provides, that stands to make google money. I automatically assume is skewed in their favor. Them or anyone else who stands to profit from playing with the numbers. Since Im a newb, trying to get started on a shoestring budget ... Means I have to work a lot harder to get quality metrics. But Im willing to do the work to avoid the pitfalls. Will let the lazy/dull newbs walk into the traps, not be one of them. If I can help it. Seasoned people, like the one's who gather here aren't fools though. You guys all know data is questionable. My take on it is turning to as many reasonably reputable sources of info and avging out the differences. Think the only way someone is going to know what's accurate ( works and doesn't) Is their experience and in my case I won't know until I acid test and actually give things a try in real life testing. Anyway, thanks for the info.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>MrSmith</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 13 Feb 2011 23:55:11 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://searchnewscentral.com/2010102065/Analytics/can-we-trust-googles-data.html#comment-361</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Barry Adams says:</title>
			<link>http://searchnewscentral.com/2010102065/Analytics/can-we-trust-googles-data.html#comment-40</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Thanks all for your comments - I'm glad to see that more people are struggling with data accuracy. @Terry: yeah I did think about Quality Score as well, but the landing page hadn't changed from the original campaign, nor had it undergone any change when we restarted the campaign. The site the landing page was on is also a fairly static site in a relatively small niche in Northern Ireland, so I can't pinpoint any single aspect that might be causing such a huge discrepancy in Adwords performance. @Richard: ah I've only ever looked at the keyword tool's data, never dug in to the API - it's time to change that I reckon. :) Might hold you to that data-sharing offer. @Steve: I was a bit hesitant to share real figures but I decided it was for the greater good and there wasn't anything particularly sensitive being shared anyway. If we don't address these flaws vocally and publicly, they'll never get fixed in any meaningful way. @Doc: thanks for that video - will take a close look at it when I'm home (buggering IT dept here at the BelTel offices have YouTube throttled). @searchbrat: yeah I suspected the GA discrepancy might have a perfectly legitimate explanation, but as you said it's a very misleading report that can result in all kinds of flawed decision making. Eager to read your views on that.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Barry Adams</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 21 Oct 2010 11:26:48 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://searchnewscentral.com/2010102065/Analytics/can-we-trust-googles-data.html#comment-40</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>searchbrat says:</title>
			<link>http://searchnewscentral.com/2010102065/Analytics/can-we-trust-googles-data.html#comment-39</link>
			<description><![CDATA[On Google Adwords, the keyword tool has never been that accurate. I would only ever use it for general trends and then test via PPC. As Richard says above, I don't buy into the "commercial intent" either. On Google Analytics, I am pretty sure the Google Analytics issue isn't inaccurate data, it's just a misleading report. The report "Content Detail with a focus on Entrance Sources" shows you the number of page views that originated from your page (Chilean Miners),this includes people who viewed the landing page and then went on to view a bunch of other pages. This is why it's higher than the Top Content report. There are a lot of misleading reports in GA - I am going to do a post on that. On GWT, I agree, the data doesn't match GA, but I don't feel these tools will ever match, due to the way they measure. Best used for general trends.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>searchbrat</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 21 Oct 2010 08:48:06 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://searchnewscentral.com/2010102065/Analytics/can-we-trust-googles-data.html#comment-39</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Doc Sheldon says:</title>
			<link>http://searchnewscentral.com/2010102065/Analytics/can-we-trust-googles-data.html#comment-37</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Matt Cutts video today... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iabVIPKFi84&feature=uploademail At the end, he inadvertently uttered a Great Truth... "Consider the source."]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Doc Sheldon</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Thu, 21 Oct 2010 02:52:27 +0000</pubDate>
			<guid>http://searchnewscentral.com/2010102065/Analytics/can-we-trust-googles-data.html#comment-37</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
