Some people don’t like the idea of Google having any data about them. Unfortunately, if you visit a site tracked by Google Analytics (and chances are you hit several each day), you have no choice. But soon, you might.
Google is testing a browser-based opt-out solution for Google Analytics, they briefly note today on the Google Analytics blog. Specifically, this would be a “global browser based plug-in to allow users to opt out of being tracked by Google Analytics.” They note that engineers are finalizing and testing the funtionality.
How exactly this will work globally across all browsers remains to be seen. While Firefox and Chrome allow for easy use of plug-ins, Internet Exploerer and Safari are a bit more complicated. Still, if you’re a user who really cares about Google not tracking this information about you, it will probably be worth it to you to install this thing.
Of course, the other question is what this means for site owners. While it’s unlikely that a lot of users would install something like this, what if they did? That could drastically cripple the entire point of Google Analytics.
[image: Paramount Pictures]
[thanks Michael]
If this comes into play, there’s a good chance I’ll stop using analytics to track my stats, what’s the point.
We prefer Google Analytics because of the information that are provided to us! The introduction of this plugin will definitely defeat the purpose of Google Analytics.
Perhaps for site owners targeting the mass, non-techie audience, this might not matter since most people won’t be installing this plugin but what about sites targeting techies?
Awstats is still pretty good.
Why would normal people want to opt-out google analytics? I mean, if you’re a publisher, you may want to do this on your own site, to keep it from tracking your own visit.
But normal people? goog analytics is not something like the doubleclick ads that is annoying….
If ever google wants to opt something out, it should be their google “spy” dashboard!
Awstats uses server logs while GA javascript tags. Feel the difference http://www.kaushik.net/avinash/2006/12/the-great-web-data-capture-debate-web-logs-or-javascript-tags.html
Only way I’d stay with GA is if they completely revamp the interface and api. I don’t care if a handful of people aren’t being tracked. Odds are if someone opts out, Google will still count them as visitors + page views however their location, IP, etc wouldn’t be stored. Completely removing all stats from these users definitely defeats the point of GA.
the one thing I hate about GA is the utter junk dashboard. We track 12 sites, what we’d like is a dashboard that quickly lists all page views, visitors, etc from all 12 sites on a single page. GA limits it to a few sites, the whole interface just plain sucks.
I ended up writing an api script so I can export that data onto a single page, however it takes a few minutes to load because of all the queries, plus the MAJOR downfall is I can’t view Adsense info via GA api.
i m using Pwiki, Google always do some peek stuff
Won’t this make wen developers choose a different tracking service other than google? I would, why would I want skewed analytics?
On the other hand, using both google analytics and another service could help shed some light on what the “paranoid internet users” market does on your site.
“Not only I’m still following you, now I can see you in the middle of the flock muahaha”
Could this be the first step toward a “premium” for companies to get a branded analytics platform that’s separate from Google but uses their technology? In other words, Google Analytics = free but can be disabled globally or you can take the option of paying to have “ACME Analytics” which can’t be disabled but can still be used “in aggregate” by Google.
The paid version is already there – Google’s Urchin Analytics. Not sure if this new opt-out will affect that or not.
Urchin ingests raw log files. Google’s proposed plug-in cannot possibly prevent the entire http request from being written to the log file.
This is disappointing.
People who opt out of ads and tracking, but still go and get free content that web sites, editors and publishers put a lot of time and effort into are really hypocritical.
I know this is a lot to ask – but understand the environment you play in before you demand changes.
When I had over-air analog TV, AC Nielsen didn’t monitor my television habits, either. Now that I have cable, I’m sure cable company stores stats on my viewing habits for marketing purposes.
If you don’t have your DVR connected to a telephone line DISH charges $5.00/month but it still works the same. I pay the fee.
Agreed – but I think scale plays more into that. Nielsen was monitoring you, just through sample vs. actual data. At the time when most people were watching over the air analog TV, the Nielsen sample was relatively accurate and something the marketers were willing to trust enough to fork over the money and the producers got their cut.
Our media options are so wide spread now, and include producers who build a product for a very niche groups of people (i.e. bloggers).
An internet sample might be somewhat represented for a Facebook, Google or YouTube, but when it comes to the majority of online content the impressions they receive are so small when compared to total impressions on the internet most would be overlooked by the sample.
And thus, media partners wouldn’t pay bloggers and content creators for the ads showing up on their sites, and those creators would likely not exist to the extent they do today.
Not disagreeing with you at all – I just feel most people take the huge amount of free content available to them for granted some times.
“People who opt out of ads and tracking, but still go and get free content that web sites, editors and publishers put a lot of time and effort into are really hypocritical.”
No we’re not. If content providers (of which I am one) don’t like it, they can, how shall I say it, GTFO.
Hypocritical would be me demanding content, but also demanding that it be free, which admittedly also happens. But if they give me a free or pay option, I’m taking free all the way.
Oh, and I’ll be installing this plugin as soon as it’s released.
@Adam Grenier,
Yes, it would appear that asking someone to “understand the environment you play in before you demand changes.” is too much to ask…
I’m going to suggest if you knew about the environment you’re referring to, you would be aware that there are a number of ways to block google analytics, NoScript is one such way.
So for those that wish to block GA it’s already possible (doing it now!).
I would assume it at least tracks opt-out users, otherwise that makes the entire product worthless especially when this will inevitably be widely used by the ad-block crowd.
just redirect domain names to yourself:
127.0.0.1 google-analytics.com
127.0.0.1 googleanalytics.com
As Jeff says below, block the analytics domains in hosts file by directing to 127.0.0.1 (above)
I just have google analytics blocked in /etc/hosts… Whaddoo I need a plug-in for? *shrug*
I recently found today on several of my sites that IE8 has a setting seemingly turned on upon download that does not allow GA to track user visits as well.
Is I am the only one that that is news too?
Ha! That’d be pretty smart. Sabotage your free offering to make sites upgrade to a white label version.
I don’t think that’s the point of the plug-in and I think Google would get too much flak for doing something like that, but who knows.
I have Analytics blocked already too. And, btw you misspelled “Explorer” in “Internet Exploerer”.
that’s stupid because every website owner has in house simple web analytics ….. No more tracking? that’s the plan ? … online Ads just get useless without tracking…..
FAIL
Content provider/merchants are the customers of Google Analytics, not the browser. Did they ask for this feature?
I am sure they did not. And if they did, I am sure it was a small portion of them that have interest in such a feature. Allowing this type of exclusion should be optional for the GA account holder.
Otherwise, as someone said, it devalues GA and people will just start to use a different service for analytics.
This seems like a feature dreamed up entirely within the engineering team. 99% of the web has no idea they are getting tracked by GA. The other 1% does not care or is using the hacks described in the comments here.
Why build this add-in?
(+/- 100% accuracy on my statistics, just like the accuracy people will have if this gets implemented)
I have to pay for my web site somehow.
So, sell products and services folks are willing to pay for. Don’t rely on Google as a crutch for anything. They’re a tool, a software as a service, but remember that it’s not an internally-controlled source of value.
Using analytics of some kind lets a site owner who does offer a service or sell products tell what works, what traffic converts (and what doesn’t) and how people get to the pages where they buy. So, people who do what you suggest have a very legitmate use for it.
I’ve always found Google Analytics to be almost as bad as Alexa anyways. On site tracking is the only thing you can trust anyways.
Since I’m in the middle of a re-launch campaign for HeavyAsHell.com I am watching as many tracking sites as i can and the only one that is even close are our on site analytics.
I get some users’ point. I use noscript myself, just because I don’t like stuff executing randomly without asking. I guess one could use something like that to block GA altogether as others have alluded to above.
HOWEVER, I guess nothing precludes content providers from making their content opaque to those that block GA; or at least trying. Something like: “Sorry, to view this site’s content you must allow Google Analytics.” And if a major player does that, it’ll be fair game for a lot of others web sites too. Then the only ones who will have been served by this feature Google plans to add are those who would think this is good riddance anyway. And if you’re that against GA, you’ve likely already fixed your problem.
So what’s the need being fulfilled here?
The tin hat and freetard brigade already have this blocked with adblockers and javascript disabled etc.
Not sure I see the point. Unless Chrome will soon not support any adblocker.
Well, the current iteration of Adblock on Chrome is a fail now anyway. I use it, but it’s not blocking half the stuff it blocks in Firefox. And yes, I configured the settings the same way.
Oh, and +1 for bringing up ‘freetards’- best. new. buzzword. ever.
Saying “is a fail” doesn’t make you sound hip. It makes you sound retarded.
And “freetard” is years old. Urban dictionary has definitions going back to 2003.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Freetard
A couple of things that I thought immediately upon reading the article. a) Good news for WebTrends, Omniture et al. b) How many companies are kicking themselves now for dropping their paid services for an all GA platform?
Needless to say there are alternatives out there, including OSS solutions. Blocking Google from getting information on you is one thing, but don’t trick yourself into thinking that your actions are not being tracked piecemeal on most medium to large sites (to say the least).
There is a Firefox plug-in called WASP which will give you an idea of what analytics software is being used on each site/page you visit. You’ll notice most big companies have GA and a paid/premium service running.
Wait, put down your pitchforks and torches. Web analytics have been around for (probably) longer than you think and is actually not as bad as you think (I’m not talking to you tin-foil-hat-guys, go back to your bomb shelter, the aliens are almost ready to attack). Just like Nielson and yes, all of the pay TV (and TiVo, etc) services out there, you are being watched like a hawk… and sorted into categories… and then sold in one massive bundle to people who care. Content providers, advertisers, etc.
Trust me, they’re less concerned about who Joe Smith is and more concerned about how your viewing actions line up with millions of others. Ever see a maxi-pad commercial during something like a boxing match? (Ladies, I said, torches and pitchforks down!). There’s a reason for that. Demographics show that the majority of the viewership have no need of ‘em. I know, a pretty basic look at the whole picture, but effective.
Web analytics is basically the same thing. I don’t care who YOU are. But if I know how you as a are interacting with my latest widget showing streaming content from my cat’s litter box, I may be more or less inclined tweak my content.
Web analytics isn’t going to make you get Right Guard advertising when you go to your secret pleasure Better Homes and Gardens website (as a male) because they know everything about you — but they may decide to create a column for dudes who dig plants (or whatever) if there is a sudden influx of male visitors. (OK, OK, I know, these are really shallow and basic examples).
Analytics goes much deeper than just demographics. In the right hands (team), the data can make huge impacts on how well a website performs for the average user. You guys don’t want to hear this, but here’s another secret — those annoying pop-ups asking if you’d be willing to take a brief survey? Yeah, companies are paying some damn good money for that software too and their results have weight when it comes time to revamp a website.
So it comes down to this. Cover your tracks and be uncounted? Or play a teeny-tiny part in how the websites you visit evolve?
i have a feeling that even if they release a full version of this plugin that we’re not hearing the full story here.
Perhaps consumers will have to pay for the plugin?
And, as someone mentioned above, there will be interesting data to emerge about who is opting out of the service (geo and demographics).
I think privacy is as important as free speech, and we can make this a win-win for everyone if we compromise and listen to the entire story, as it develops, to understand the true caveats of this possible release.
the comments above don’t seem to address the business purpose of GA, only the ‘consumer rights’ are talked about it seems. From a business point of view GA help to provide a better website experience by allowing website owners to realign their content based on information gathered through GA e.g. providing popular content on the home page or top level pages rather than burying it within the site. It also helps businesses to align their search strategy to key terms so users can find relevant information easier. Yes there is a business benefit to GA but there is also a User benefit if companies actually analyse and implement based on the information provided by GA.
If you want to block yourself from being tracked by a third party analytics service, you probably already know how. (e.g. adblock filters for “ga.js” and “urchin.js” – you’re done).
This is just wrong.
My gut feeling here is this is for 3rd party tracking and not for sites specifically. I would imagine GA would work as usual on sitexyz123.com but tracking beyond that (for browser habits, search ads, etc.) could be disabled.
This would be in line with the recent self regulation of advertisers online who are in fear of government regulation on privacy concerns. I.e. police yourselves or uncle sam will do it for you.
Great!
I think this might be about speed.
One of the mantras at Google for the last year and a bit has been speed, speed, speed. A good example is the wording of the Microsoft European Browser Choise screen seen at http://techcrunch.com/2010/03/18/microsofts-european-browser-choice-screen-causes-spike-in-opera-downloads/ – the third word is “fast” .
If they really are serious about this speed thing, perhaps they have realized that the massive use of GA is contributing to the slowing of the net?
I do not use Ga on my sites because I want to have as fast a site as possible and so keeping down the number of scripts is important to me.
BUT, I would like to have better analytics derived from my raw logs. If we see a drop in GA accuracy, could we see an improvement in the packages available for analysis of raw logs? Let’s face it, most of those packages are pretty poor and many hosts have been neglecting them in the years since GA came along.
I would happily pay a bit more for my hosting package if it came with really good analytics which did NOT have an impact on my users’ speed and did not ask their browsers to execute even more scripts on page load.
The new asynchronous ga tracking method doesn’t delay page load at all. the speed argument doesn’t hold up. this is pure paranoia. people are going to opt out because they’re offering an opt-out so they figure there must be something sneaky abuout it. in reality, having ga tracking enabled just gives web devs better info to improve the site.
Well, I don’t use GA on my web site, but if a person can block GA in a browser, they can block any JavaScript-based tracker. So yeah, this is good news for the services and open source packages that work by reading Apache or IIS log files.
I wouldn’t want to be selling something that used browser-based JavaScript tracking to make business decisions right now. ;-)
Most large/semi-popular web analytics services provide both log file analysis and .js scripts (which is much more robust than using just log files, BTW).
That’s definitely a double-edged sword for me. On one hand, I’m a web owner (of course), so it will effect the way I track my stats. At least the things such as the percentage of visitors on pages and bounce rates should not be affected. On the other hand, I don’t like Google knowing where I’m visiting, so it’s a big plus there. No matter whether or not I like this decision, I definitely hope that Google will continue to get bigger on privacy.
just disable 3rd party cookies
It’s pretty useless b/c i could just go through the server logs and view every users session
what a waste of time and money
GA doesn’t use third party cookies…
how are GA not 3rd party cookies?
If i'm on domaina.com and there is a cookie dropped from google, thats not a first party cookie
privacy comes at a price.
as a site owner, this is a quagmire. while I empathize and share visitors’ concerns for privacy and the ability to opt-out of tracking, site data provides valuable information in the direction and performance of the site real estate that are the vitality of the business channel. others might suggest using the site to sell a product or service but for many sites content is the service. so the alternative is to develop a subscription for visitors to access content. a subscription will require some type of authentication and, likely, a nominal fee (to displace ad revenue). in this scenario, the site owner will still be able to collect user activity and the user will now pay for privacy…but only from g-analytics. so such a change could be disruptive to the openness of the internet.
not to overblow this announcement, but this development could be a fundamental shift in analytics tracking if the market shifts and requires competitive services to adopt similar practices, or significantly decrease the value of google analytics’ effectiveness with consideration to competitive offerings that many organizations would be willing to pay fees for such rich data.
Nice job breaking it, Google.
Seem like no good for webmaster. This company is trying to optimize its profit and forget about publisher.