Saturday, April 13, 2019

DuckDuckGo vs. Google: An In-Depth Search Engine Comparison - Search Engine Journal

DuckDuckGo vs. Google: An In-Depth Search Engine Comparison - Search Engine Journal


DuckDuckGo vs. Google: An In-Depth Search Engine Comparison - Search Engine Journal

Posted: 12 Apr 2019 05:31 AM PDT

In the world of search, Google towers above the rest.

It's the "industry standard" search engine that is relied on in most any instance (at least in the United States), and, let's be honest: it's for good reason.

Google search is an amazing tool.

But competitors are always going to be vying for search market share. And from time to time, there are going to be some great search engines that are actually worth using.

DuckDuckGo may just be one of those competitors, especially if you're looking for privacy that you may not get elsewhere. But DuckDuckGo has plenty more to offer searchers.

What follows is an in-depth comparison of the features of two great search engines we love – DuckDuckGo and Google. As we try to answer the question: which search engine should you use?

DuckDuckGo

Search Features

Founded in 2008, DuckDuckGo claims to not store personal information of its users, ever.

"Our privacy policy is simple: we don't collect or share any of your personal information," the website's homepage says below the main search field.

DuckDuckGo doesn't follow its users around with ads since it won't store their search history, won't track their IP address, and essentially has no personal data to sell, regardless of whether the user is in private browsing mode.

DuckDuckGo separated itself from the competition early and often in terms of the privacy it offers its users – that same privacy other search engines have refused to offer until DuckDuckGo.

Just take a look at its Twitter feed if you want to find out how pro-privacy this search engine is.

But beyond privacy, what else does DuckDuckGo bring to the table?

For starters, it has a similar layout to Google, including:

  • Search engine landing pages (SERPs) of 10 organic search results (both search engines served 10 organic search results on their respective Page 1s in March 2019).
  • A couple of ads at the top and the bottom of each SERP, give or take one or two and depending on the search volume and competition around certain keywords and topics.

DuckDuckGo uses its web crawler, DuckDuckBot, and up to 400 other sources to compile its search results, including other search engines like Bing, Yahoo, and Yandex, and crowdsourcing sites like Wikipedia.

It also offers a Knowledge panel-like breakout box on the right rail with quick-access information for important details like name, address, phone number, website, etc., drawn from those above-mentioned sources, including Wikipedia (much like Google).

DuckDuckGo pulls information from user-review site Yelp, including reviews, addresses, phone numbers, and business hours.

Business-location directions are pulled from Bing Maps (by default), but this can be changed to Google Maps, HERE Maps, or OneStreetMap as the source (screenshot below).

DuckDuckGo vs. Google: An In-Depth Search Engine Comparison

DuckDuckGo offers a number of other simple usability and/or preference tweaks that help simplify the overall process for the user, many of which Google implemented first – but not all of them.

For instance, once a user has reached the bottom of a SERP, they can select to see more results, which opens up the next SERP directly below the current one (without opening a new page). It's a simple difference but it does make the user experience a bit cleaner.

Category Pages are one of my personal favorite features of the DuckDuckGo platform, offering category lineups with brief descriptions and images that are presented in a clean, enticing way.

And, like Google (although not as extensive), DuckDuckGo offers Instant Answers (comparable to Google's Featured Snippets), which are pulled from more than 100 sources around the web, according to DuckDuckGo.

There are also search-vertical options, including:

  • Web results.
  • Image results.
  • Video results.
  • News results.
  • Maps results.

And, depending on which vertical you search with, DuckDuckGo will dynamically generate applicable search verticals.

For instance, when you search a food or favorite dish, DuckDuckGo will trigger the "Recipes" vertical for you (screenshot below).

DuckDuckGo vs. Google: An In-Depth Search Engine Comparison

DuckDuckGo also has a simple site-search command it calls "!bang syntax" that makes searching one website a lot easier (not that it's never been done before).

There are some other usability features that DuckDuckGo offers its users, but its biggest messaging points come from:

  • The brand's high standards for privacy.
  • Being an efficient and respectable search engine despite its small piece of search market share (only .22 percent of total market share, well below Ask, Yandex, Baidu, and all three "major players" in the United States, Google, Bing, and Yahoo).

DuckDuckGo annual traffic did grow by 55 percent in 2017 and by 56 percent in 2018 – with just under 6 billion searches in 2017 and more than 9.2 billion in 2018.

That number is obviously expected to grow, too – but to what extent, we don't yet know.

If it keeps growing at this rate, though, more people will continue to take notice and more people will join in.

Pros of Using DuckDuckGo

Privacy

A staple of its foundation, DuckDuckGo preaches its desire to not track any information of its users or their searches, and prides itself on offering the most private search engine on the market.

Easy to Use

Its clean interface and simple user experience make using the platform a somewhat-unique search experience.

Usability seems to be a primary focus, and it shows. It's also aesthetically pleasing while still following the basic concept and layout of other search engines.

Growing in Popularity

The more users, the more profit, the more resources = better search engine.

Cons of Using DuckDuckGo

Not as Good as Google ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

It's the mom-and-pop version of a search engine, while Google is the premium gold standard.

DuckDuckGo simply doesn't have the resources of big, long-standing search engines. But it's getting more every year, including a $10 million investment at the end of 2018.

Tiny Search Market Share

DuckDuckGo only owned .22 percent of total search market share in 2017, which is less than Ask, Yandex, Baidu, and all three "major players" in the United States (Google, Bing, and Yahoo).

This means there is room for a lot of growth, but it needs to sustain its increasing popularity for years to come to gain significant market share.

Going to Always be Playing Catch-up

Features, ideas, and practices of DuckDuckGo are going to (for the most part) shadow Google (including doing the opposite of what Google is doing in terms privacy).

This isn't out of the norm for other search engines; they're all chasing the big dog, Google.

Google

Search Features

Google is the O.G.

But why, exactly?

To start, it's the most robust, vast search engine out there in more ways than one, with a family of tools and databases to accompany it and support its mission of delivering the most relevant, credible answers quickly and easily.

For instance, owning a tool as powerful as Google Maps, which boasts a plethora of significant information for businesses across the world – from names, addresses, phone numbers, and websites, but also business-related photos that include interiors, exteriors, and everyday interactions – puts Google in a good position for success at its core.

We know Google tried to establish a human network with similar, useful information in Google+, which is Google's latest victim of the chopping block.

While this was a futile effort in the end, it illustrates Google's dedication to, not just improving search, but owning and building high-quality vessels to improve it through its platform.

Like DuckDuckGo, Google offers specific search verticals to help simply searches, but with more options.

In addition to traditional web results, and the above-mentioned Maps results, there are verticals for:

  • News.
  • Videos.
  • Images.
  • Shopping.
  • Books.
  • Flights.
  • Finance.
  • Personal searches.

There are additional search settings and tools that can be used to further refine searches (shown below).

DuckDuckGo vs. Google: An In-Depth Search Engine Comparison

"The Google Search index contains hundreds of billions of webpages and is well over 100,000,000 gigabytes in size," Google says.

This is, by far, the vastest of search engine indexes. And it's one of the main reasons Google is the dominate player in search.

It isn't just the largest search index; it's also the smartest.

Google is constantly making updates to its algorithms and ranking signals, including the addition of artificial intelligence via RankBrain. This machine-learning mechanism is another reason Google dominates and delivers, with no competitor close in sight.

It has the best crawlers, the best index, and the best algorithms, which is why I always believe something I often say: "If it's not on Google, it's not real."

This is a playful statement based on Google's incredible ability to identify search queries – and their answers – from unique long-tail searches without some of the most important piece of information.

For instance, finding a film about a particular person or place without knowing the name of the movie, year of origin, or other seemingly critical information.

When I look for a 1980s skateboarding movie with a name I don't know but remember the main character has blonde hair, Google delivers me the answer I am looking for right in Position 1.

DuckDuckGo vs. Google: An In-Depth Search Engine Comparison

The movie I was looking for is, of course, "Gleaming the Cube" with Christian Slater from 1989.

There are other popular entities that Google owns that contribute to making it the powerhouse it is, like YouTube, Gmail, Play, and AdSense, and so on.

It also boasts one of the best (and free) tool suites for productivity that includes Sheets, Docs, Slides, Calendar, and more.

That's not to forget Google's free tools for webmasters and marketers, including Google Analytics and Search Console.

What makes Google the true Goliath of the industry? It's the combination of:

  • Its vast network of Alphabet-owned tools and properties.
  • Its unmatched ability to understand real-world entities and their relationship to one another (things, not strings).
  • Its constant commitment to improving the Google Search experience for the short- and long-term.
  • Its unparalleled leadership in the world of search and all things websites, we know what makes Google the true Goliath of the industry.

And while it is the biggest and best search engine out there, it doesn't change the fact that Google is, in fact, always extracting information from its users and applying it where it can for the gain of the company and/or the people paying the company for the extracted user data and/or advertising.

It's no secret that Google is doing this, so it's not "ethically" wrong; it's just not known by the majority of users exactly what data is being used, what it's being used for, and why it's being used at all.

This has allowed Google to become one of the richest companies in the world, and it's much ado to its targeted advertising sold on its own platform and through its many partners.

That still doesn't change the fact that it is the best search engine out there.

That's actually exactly why it has become one of the most successful companies: the quality of its search platform.

Pros of Using Google

It's the Best

Google has and will continue to accomplish feats other companies – including search engines – simply aren't able to yet, if ever.

It's a superstar brand that has been, not just in the thick of search since its inception, but pushing it to new heights anytime it can, and before all of its competitors.

It's Unmatched

Google has the largest search index, the smartest search engine algorithm, and the largest portfolio of free tools that all fit right inside its search engine.

It's the Dominant Power of Search

Yeah, it's basically the same as the two points above. But it's what truly matters.

Google is the best and has been for quite some time. And it has changed every American's life since its launch in 1998.

It will continue to be ingrained in our lives for many years to come.

Cons of Using Google

It's Hard Not to Feel Violated

Google also has the largest ad network, too. That's thanks to data its compiled from its users and their behavior.

On the organic side, Google treats personalization as a benefit to the user, but that's all achieved through data collection as well.

Overthink User Experience & Other Ideas

Google is always testing features and changes, big and small, to try and get an idea of what works best.

Sometimes, Google will change things and, afterwards, it doesn't seem like it was a change for the better.

But, that's Google, and sometimes the changes (or lack of commonsense features) leave webmasters, marketers, and searchers scratching their heads.

It Isn't Always Right (Still)

While it's impressive in most everything it does, Google's full-blown launch of its Featured Snippet attribute led to a lot more "noticeable" wrong or misleading answers.

In trying to provide its best (and often auto-generated) quick answer for simple questions, Google sometimes has pulled incorrect information (on a wide range of severity) that still shows the computer can't always outsmart (or out-do!) humans.

Which Search Engine Should You Use?

As someone who somehow used Yahoo mail for two solid decades, I can admit I am an iconoclast that prefers the less-common options and going against the current. However, this is not why I was still using Yahoo email in 2017. 😆

I used Yahoo mail for that long because I liked how it operated (until I had my account hacked, then said hacking was covered up) and I was comfortable with it.

As a news-junkie and newspaper reader, Yahoo's front page always enticed me to stick around, scroll, and read. And the stories are tailored to the user, so I was being served content I should and would eat right up.

Without at least scanning through and, I'm sure, storing some – if not most – of my user data, that Yahoo homepage would have never had been as successful as it was in terms of grabbing my attention and piquing my unique interests to read a bunch of content there daily. And I knew that after the first 12 years or so.

More importantly, I didn't mind because it worked for me.

So, what does Yahoo have to do with whether you should use DuckDuckGo or Google?

What works best for you is the right answer here. It's all about preference.

Both search engines can likely get you the answer your looking for, and in a time-efficient manner.

Anyone who is passionate about privacy would likely lean toward – and prefer – DuckDuckGo solely for its strong privacy policies but also since it is a better-than-average search engine trying to do right for the people. And it does a strong job in achieving that.

That doesn't change the fact that, if you can't find an answer on DuckDuckGo, you're going to go to Google to find it. And you will find it there.

Otherwise, it doesn't exist.

More Resources:


Image Credits 

All screenshots taken by author, April 2019

Google spotted testing version of GoogleBot that can render more content - Search Engine Land

Posted: 12 Apr 2019 07:12 AM PDT

DeepCrawl discovered that Google is testing a new GoogleBot that can render the web like a modern Chrome browser.

We knew Google was looking to improve GoogleBot's ability to render web pages using more advanced JavaScript or advanced web apps. Google developer advocate Martin Splitt has confirmed the test.

GoogleBot rendering more. Here is a screen shot from DeepCrawl showing what this new experimental GoogleBot can render, which is above Chrome version 69:

This is what the normal GoogleBot can render, similar to Chrome version 41:

Google confirmed. Martin Splitt from Google has confirmed on Twitter that this is indeed something Google is testing. Martin said "We're testing things all the time and sometimes these experiments are visible."

Why we should care. If GoogleBot is able to render web pages like a modern browser, SEOs, publishers and content producers won't have to worry as much when building modern web apps. These web apps won't need workarounds like dynamic rendering to get the content crawled, indexed and potentially ranking well in Google search.



About The Author

Barry Schwartz is Search Engine Land's News Editor and owns RustyBrick, a NY based web consulting firm. He also runs Search Engine Roundtable, a popular search blog on SEM topics.

Tracking Phones, Google Is a Dragnet for the Police - New York Times

Posted: 13 Apr 2019 07:47 AM PDT

When detectives in a Phoenix suburb arrested a warehouse worker in a murder investigation last December, they credited a new technique with breaking open the case after other leads went cold.

The police told the suspect, Jorge Molina, they had data tracking his phone to the site where a man was shot nine months earlier. They had made the discovery after obtaining a search warrant that required Google to provide information on all devices it recorded near the killing, potentially capturing the whereabouts of anyone in the area.

Investigators also had other circumstantial evidence, including security video of someone firing a gun from a white Honda Civic, the same model that Mr. Molina owned, though they could not see the license plate or attacker.

But after he spent nearly a week in jail, the case against Mr. Molina fell apart as investigators learned new information and released him. Last month, the police arrested another man: his mother's ex-boyfriend, who had sometimes used Mr. Molina's car.

The warrants, which draw on an enormous Google database employees call Sensorvault, turn the business of tracking cellphone users' locations into a digital dragnet for law enforcement. In an era of ubiquitous data gathering by tech companies, it is just the latest example of how personal information — where you go, who your friends are, what you read, eat and watch, and when you do it — is being used for purposes many people never expected. As privacy concerns have mounted among consumers, policymakers and regulators, tech companies have come under intensifying scrutiny over their data collection practices.

The Arizona case demonstrates the promise and perils of the new investigative technique, whose use has risen sharply in the past six months, according to Google employees familiar with the requests. It can help solve crimes. But it can also snare innocent people.

Technology companies have for years responded to court orders for specific users' information. The new warrants go further, suggesting possible suspects and witnesses in the absence of other clues. Often, Google employees said, the company responds to a single warrant with location information on dozens or hundreds of devices.

Law enforcement officials described the method as exciting, but cautioned that it was just one tool.

Opinion

The Privacy Project

The New York Times is launching an ongoing examination of privacy. We'll dig into the ideas, history and future of how our information navigates the digital ecosystem and what's at stake.

"It doesn't pop out the answer like a ticker tape, saying this guy's guilty," said Gary Ernsdorff, a senior prosecutor in Washington State who has worked on several cases involving these warrants. Potential suspects must still be fully investigated, he added. "We're not going to charge anybody just because Google said they were there."

It is unclear how often these search requests have led to arrests or convictions, because many of the investigations are still open and judges frequently seal the warrants. The practice was first used by federal agents in 2016, according to Google employees, and first publicly reported last year in North Carolina. It has since spread to local departments across the country, including in California, Florida, Minnesota and Washington. This year, one Google employee said, the company received as many as 180 requests in one week. Google declined to confirm precise numbers.

The technique illustrates a phenomenon privacy advocates have long referred to as the "if you build it, they will come" principle — anytime a technology company creates a system that could be used in surveillance, law enforcement inevitably comes knocking. Sensorvault, according to Google employees, includes detailed location records involving at least hundreds of millions of devices worldwide and dating back nearly a decade.

The new orders, sometimes called "geofence" warrants, specify an area and a time period, and Google gathers information from Sensorvault about the devices that were there. It labels them with anonymous ID numbers, and detectives look at locations and movement patterns to see if any appear relevant to the crime. Once they narrow the field to a few devices they think belong to suspects or witnesses, Google reveals the users' names and other information.

''There are privacy concerns that we all have with our phones being tracked — and when those kinds of issues are relevant in a criminal case, that should give everybody serious pause," said Catherine Turner, a Minnesota defense lawyer who is handling a case involving the technique.

Investigators who spoke with The New York Times said they had not sent geofence warrants to companies other than Google, and Apple said it did not have the ability to perform those searches. Google would not provide details on Sensorvault, but Aaron Edens, an intelligence analyst with the sheriff's office in San Mateo County, Calif., who has examined data from hundreds of phones, said most Android devices and some iPhones he had seen had this data available from Google.

In a statement, Richard Salgado, Google's director of law enforcement and information security, said that the company tried to "vigorously protect the privacy of our users while supporting the important work of law enforcement." He added that it handed over identifying information only "where legally required."

Mr. Molina, 24, said he was shocked when the police told him they suspected him of murder, and he was surprised at their ability to arrest him based largely on data.

"I just kept thinking, You're innocent, so you're going to get out," he said, but he added that he worried that it could take months or years to be exonerated. "I was scared," he said.

Detectives have used the warrants for help with robberies, sexual assaults, arsons and murders. Last year, federal agents requested the data to investigate a string of bombings around Austin, Tex.

The unknown suspect had left package bombs at three homes, killing two people, when investigators obtained a warrant.

They were looking for phones Google had recorded around the bombing locations.

The specific data resulting from the warrants in the Austin case remains sealed. This illustration is based on the warrant's description of the process, but the dots do not represent actual phone locations.

After receiving a warrant, Google gathers location information from its database, Sensorvault, and sends it to investigators, with each device identified by an anonymous ID code.

Investigators review the data and look for patterns in the locations of devices that could suggest possible suspects. They also look for devices that appear in multiple areas targeted by the warrant.

They can then get further location data on devices that appear relevant, allowing them to see device movement beyond the original area defined in the warrant.

After detectives narrow the field to a few devices they think may belong to suspects or witnesses, Google reveals the name, email address and other data associated with the device.

Rich Harris / The New York Times

Austin investigators obtained another warrant after a fourth bomb exploded. But the suspect killed himself three days after that bomb, as they were closing in. Officials at the time said surveillance video and receipts for suspicious purchases helped identify him.

An F.B.I. spokeswoman declined to comment on whether the response from Google was helpful or timely, saying that any question about the technique "touches on areas we don't discuss."

Officers who have used the warrants said they showed promise in finding suspects as well as witnesses who may have been near the crime without realizing it. The searches may also be valuable in cold cases. A warrant last year in Florida, for example, sought information on a murder from 2016. A Florida Department of Law Enforcement spokeswoman declined to comment on whether the data was helpful.

The approach has yielded useful information even if it wasn't what broke the case open, investigators said. In a home invasion in Minnesota, for example, Google data showed a phone taking the path of the likely intruder, according to a news report and police documents. But detectives also cited other leads, including a confidential informant, in developing suspects. Four people were charged in federal court.

According to several current and former Google employees, the Sensorvault database was not designed for the needs of law enforcement, raising questions about its accuracy in some situations.

Though Google's data cache is enormous, it doesn't sweep up every phone, said Mr. Edens, the California intelligence analyst. And even if a location is recorded every few minutes, that may not coincide with a shooting or an assault.

Google often doesn't provide information right away, investigators said. The Google unit handling the requests has struggled to keep up, so it can take weeks or months for a response. In the Arizona investigation, police received data six months after sending the warrant. In a different Minnesota case this fall, it came in four weeks.

But despite the drawbacks, detectives noted how precise the data was and how it was collected even when people weren't making calls or using apps — both improvements over tracking that relies on cell towers.

"It shows the whole pattern of life," said Mark Bruley, the deputy police chief in Brooklyn Park, Minn., where investigators have been using the technique since this fall. "That's the game changer for law enforcement."

Location data is a lucrative business — and Google is by far the biggest player, propelled largely by its Android phones. It uses the data to power advertising tailored to a person's location, part of a more than $20 billion market for location-based ads last year.

In 2009, the company introduced Location History, a feature for users who wanted to see where they had been. Sensorvault stores information on anyone who has opted in, allowing regular collection of data from GPS signals, cellphone towers, nearby Wi-Fi devices and Bluetooth beacons.

People who turn on the feature can see a timeline of their activity and get recommendations based on it. Google apps prompt users to enable Location History for things like traffic alerts. Information in the database is held indefinitely, unless the user deletes it.

"We citizens are giving this stuff away," said Mr. Ernsdorff, the Washington State prosecutor, adding that if companies were collecting data, law enforcement should be able to obtain a court order to use it.

Current and former Google employees said they were surprised by the warrants. Brian McClendon, who led the development of Google Maps and related products until 2015, said he and other engineers had assumed the police would seek data only on specific people. The new technique, he said, "seems like a fishing expedition."

The practice raises novel legal issues, according to Orin Kerr, a law professor at the University of Southern California and an expert on criminal law in the digital age.

One concern: the privacy of innocent people scooped up in these searches. Several law enforcement officials said the information remained sealed in their jurisdictions but not in every state.

In Minnesota, for example, the name of an innocent man was released to a local journalist after it became part of the police record. Investigators had his information because he was within 170 feet of a burglary. Reached by a reporter, the man said he was surprised about the release of his data and thought he might have appeared because he was a cabdriver. "I drive everywhere," he said.

These searches also raise constitutional questions. The Fourth Amendment says a warrant must request a limited search and establish probable cause that evidence related to a crime will be found.

Warrants reviewed by The Times frequently established probable cause by explaining that most Americans owned cellphones and that Google held location data on many of these phones. The areas they targeted ranged from single buildings to multiple blocks, and most sought data over a few hours. In the Austin case, warrants covered several dozen houses around each bombing location, for times ranging from 12 hours to a week. It wasn't clear whether Google responded to all the requests, and multiple officials said they had seen the company push back on broad searches.

Last year, the Supreme Court ruled that a warrant was required for historical data about a person's cellphone location over weeks, but the court has not ruled on anything like geofence searches, including a technique that pulls information on all phones registered to a cell tower.

Google's legal staff decided even before the 2018 ruling that the company would require warrants for location inquiries, and it crafted the procedure that first reveals only anonymous data.

"Normally we think of the judiciary as being the overseer, but as the technology has gotten more complex, courts have had a harder and harder time playing that role," said Jennifer Granick, surveillance and cybersecurity counsel at the American Civil Liberties Union. "We're depending on companies to be the intermediary between people and the government."

In several cases reviewed by The Times, a judge approved the entire procedure in a single warrant, relying on investigators' assurances that they would seek data for only the most relevant devices. Google responds to those orders, but Mr. Kerr said it was unclear whether multistep warrants should pass legal muster.

Some jurisdictions require investigators to return to a judge and obtain a second warrant before getting identifying information. With another warrant, investigators can obtain more extensive data, including months of location patterns and even emails.

Investigators in Arizona have never publicly disclosed a likely motive in the killing of Joseph Knight, the crime for which Mr. Molina was arrested. In a court document, they described Mr. Knight, a 29-year-old aircraft repair company employee, as having no known history of drug use or gang activity.

Detectives sent the geofence warrant to Google soon after the murder and received data from four devices months later. One device, a phone Google said was linked to Mr. Molina's account, appeared to follow the path of the gunman's car as seen on video. His carrier also said the phone was associated with a tower in roughly the same area, and his Google history showed a search about local shootings the day after the attack.

After his arrest, Mr. Molina told officers that Marcos Gaeta, his mother's ex-boyfriend, had sometimes taken his car. The Times found a traffic ticket showing that Mr. Gaeta, 38, had driven that car without a license. Mr. Gaeta also had a lengthy criminal record.

While Mr. Molina was in jail, a friend told his public defender, Jack Litwak, that she was with him at his home about the time of the shooting, and she and others provided texts and Uber receipts to bolster his case. His home, where he lives with his mother and three siblings, is about two miles from the murder scene.

Mr. Litwak said his investigation found that Mr. Molina had sometimes signed in to other people's phones to check his Google account. That could lead someone to appear in two places at once, though it was not clear whether that happened in this case.

Mr. Gaeta was arrested in California on an Arizona warrant. He was then charged in a separate California homicide from 2016. Officials said that case would probably delay his extradition to Arizona.

A police spokesman said "new information came to light" after Mr. Molina's arrest, but the department would not comment further.

Months after his release, Mr. Molina was having trouble getting back on his feet. After being arrested at work, a Macy's warehouse, he lost his job. His car was impounded for investigation and then repossessed.

The investigators "had good intentions" in using the technique, Mr. Litwak said. But, he added, "they're hyping it up to be this new DNA type of forensic evidence, and it's just not."

Michael LaForgia contributed reporting. Kitty Bennett contributed research.

Google Search Console Performance Report AMP Stories Search Appearance Filter - Search Engine Roundtable

Posted: 12 Apr 2019 05:08 AM PDT

The same day Google launched the new Discover performance report in Google Search Console, Google announced they also now let you see your AMP Stories traffic. I have not seen any examples of AMP Stories showing up in these reports, so I cannot share any real screen shots but Google did announce it on Twitter.

Here is the tweet:

I went ahead and mocked up what the search appearance filter in the performance report might look like but again, this is a mock up - I do not have any sites that do AMP Stories or QA rich results in my Google Search Console account:

If you have any screen shots to share, I'd love to see it. Post the image in the comments or send it to me @rustybrick.

The help document does mention it, it says under the search appearance filters "AMP stories - a visual storytelling format built on AMP that enables a user to tap through full screen images and videos." The cached version from April 2nd does not mention AMP Stories specifically.

Also in that cached page is no mention of "Q&A rich results" but in the new updated page it has it listed as a filter "Q&A rich results - A Q&A page rich result." More on Q&A schema is over there.

So you got not just Android apps but also AMP Stories and Q&A rich results as new filters this week in the Google Search Console performance report and a brand new Discover performance report - yay!

Forum discussion at Twitter.

Update: Q&A is old but it was just added to the help doc:

Update 2: Here is another screen shot of more search appearance filters:

Update 3: It is not called AMP Stories, it is called AMP story in the filter, here is a screen shot:

No comments:

Post a Comment