Last month Google made the announcement that in addition to its regular search choice they would start offering a new “secure” alternative.  The new offering can be found at https://www.google.com and the idea behind the new service is rather simple. By using SSL technology you are able to create a secure and encrypted connection between your browser and Google, ensuring that no third parties on your network will be able to intercept your search results.

However, this new enhanced privacy potentially comes at a cost for those of us out there who rely on analytical software to gain valuable insights into how users come to discover our site. Let’s say for example you owned a website that sold home theatre systems, traditionally when a user searched for the phrase “buy home theatre” in Google they would be taken to the address http://www.google.com/search?q=buy+home+theatre. Then when a user clicked your listing in the search results and was taken to your website, using analytical software you could then see what page the user came from, and in turn, discover what search phrases they used to discover your site.

Conversely though, due to the way modern browsers handle the transition from a secure SSL connection to a regular webpage all information that would regularly be sent in the browsers referrers string is lost, leaving website owners seemingly with no way to determine what phrases are used to discover their site in Google. Some in the industry have been screaming that this is the death of analytics; however this is simply not the case.

It would be worthwhile noting that Google’s new SSL anonymous search alternative is in no way the default option and while it is too early to determine any meaningful data in terms of usage and adoption rates among regular web users, the general consensus so far seems to be that this is not going to be the next “big thing”.

Furthermore, something that seems to have been lost thus far in the panic is that for years now the millions of users running one of the many Internet security programs from vendors such as McAffe, Norton and Symantec tend to strip the referral string by default, albeit to zero fuss.

While it does seem at this stage rather unlikely that this new offering from Google will have any major effect for most website owners at this stage, for those who wish to err on the side of caution, a solution exists.

As previously mentioned the information contained within the browsers referrer string is only lost when the user’s browser makes the transition from a secure SSL connection to a regular unencrypted connection. Simply by offering users a secure connection when visiting your site you will be able to continue to capture the valuable analytical insights contained within the referrer string.

In the end it remains to be seen exactly what, if anything, this means for analytics. In the mean time, it’s nice to know that a solution exists.

What do social media and tattoos have in common? They’re both things you might live to regret!

At the end of 2009 the major search engines brokered deals with the larger social media players (i.e. Twitter), allowing them to index real time content and thus further embedding social information within search results.

Will consumers and businesses start trawling for information via the likes of Google and what will they come up with?

As we continue to live in the now, we tend to forget about the potential long term implications associated with Social Media. For example, a recent security flaw on Facebook highlighted that there is the potential to compromise private conversations.

Should consumer privacy concerns continue to mount; what are the implications to businesses? Will consumers tend to shy away from engaging with brands within Social Media platforms? How will consumer behaviour change?

An article published recently in the New York Times discussed how the concerned “Tell-All Generation Learns to Keep Things Offline” are increasingly “self censoring” digital assets they post on social media networks. Concerns regarding potential career prospects were covered in the article; where photos of not so flattering or derogative comments may come back to haunt you one day. Will prospective employers use these forums to conduct character references? Other concerns related to identity theft and other privacy related matters are also discussed.

Research findings published in the New York Times article showed “In its telephone survey of 1,000 people, the Berkeley Centre for Law and Technology at the University of California found that 88 percent of the 18- to 24-year-olds it surveyed last July said there should be a law that requires Web sites to delete stored information. And 62 percent said they wanted a law that gave people the right to know everything a Web site knows about them.”

Given this insight how will social media play out? Will it be the role of government to facilitate stringent privacy legislation or will it be left in the hands of the consumer?

What are your thoughts? Will this slow down uptake?

For those of you too busy to read the news in the past 24 hours, there’s been a pretty major development in the land of the search engines. Microsoft and Yahoo! have announced a deal whereby they will be combining their search offerings with the aim of invigorating the challenge to Google.

In essence, the deal means Microsoft will power Yahoo’s search. Searching through Yahoo! will still have Yahoo! branding, and be consistent with their look and feel, but will have ‘Powered by Bing’ at the bottom of the search engine results. It is said that Bing will be the exclusive algorithmic search and pay-per-click platform for Yahoo! sites.

Interview with Yahoo! CEO Carol Bartz:

While it may sound like Microsoft are getting the better of this deal, Yahoo! will become the exclusive worldwide relationship sales force for both companies’ premium search advertisers, and will also continue to use its own technology for display advertising. However, the deal doesn’t cover other web products, such as e-mail and IM, so the companies will continue to compete on some fronts.

Considering that Yahoo! rejected a bid of almost $50 billion not so long ago, it may be surprising to hear that this deal will not include any money upfront. Instead, Microsoft are to compensate Yahoo! through a revenue sharing agreement on traffic coming from Yahoo’s owned and operated sites – 88% of generated revenue will go to Yahoo!.

The 10 year agreement will take around two years to come into effect, but will bear fruit to a more formidable search offering, with 30% predicted market share in the US. Many of those at Yahoo! will be offered new jobs at Microsoft while others will be offered redundancy packages.

In Australia, where Google holds a greater market share of approximately 90% (compared to around 65% in the US), this new union will have a harder time of breaking dominance. However, Bing has been holding its own since launch and reports have been pretty positive from the early adopters. Joe Pollard, ninemsn CEO, told B&T: “Since the global launch of Bing just two months ago, ninemsn has put in place ambitious plans to grow Bing in the Australian search market. We believe that successfully competing in search requires a combination of innovation, scale and an unmoving focus on satisfying the needs of the online consumer. Together with these elements, the new Microsoft and Yahoo! deal will have a positive effect on Bing’s trajectory. Although we are still very much in the early stages of collaboration, the deal will provide more consumers and advertisers with an innovative and engaging search alternative which is a great thing for the Australian market.”

It will be very interesting to see the real impact of this merger, and also hear how the intricacies of the deal will pan out as the next few months go by.