A few months ago, thousands of leaked documents surfaced from Google's vault, revealing secrets that they never wanted us to see. Buried within were four discoveries that, if true, could change everything we know about search engine optimization (SEO). For over a decade, Google has denied the existence of these practices. While some have raised concerns, they were often ignored or dismissed. However, after pulling people on Twitter, 72% believed Google is actively deceiving us. I had to uncover the truth.

Why would Google lie? What could they gain by misleading millions of webmasters who rely on their guidelines to optimize content? Is it just a misunderstanding, or is something more sinister at play? Because if Google, a company that once vowed "don't be evil," is manipulating us, then who can we trust?

seoican

Chrome: The Secret Data Mine

The first piece of this puzzle takes us back to 2012, centered around a product you're probably using right now: Google Chrome. At a search engine marketing conference, Matt Cutts, a former engineer and head of web spam at Google, was asked if Chrome browser data is used in their search ranking algorithm. He denied it. Cutts eventually left Google, and with him, the rumors about Chrome data faded away. But a decade later, John Mueller, a senior analyst at Google, faced a similar question: Does Google use Chrome data for ranking? His answer:

“I don’t think we use anything from Google Chrome for ranking.”

These denials planted the seeds of doubt, which would later be exposed in the leaks. The documents revealed a module called Chrome in Total, which sought to collect the full clickstream of billions of internet users. Clickstream data tracks everything you do online: the websites you visit, the links you click, and how long you stay. Chrome handed this data to Google on a silver platter.

Since 63% of internet users browse with Chrome, Google can potentially understand how over half the planet interacts with the web. But why would Google lie about using Chrome data?

"Google rose to the top of the search world quickly, but internally, I suspect they believed they had to keep their competitive advantages secret," said one source. "I also suspect Google is using its monopoly power in search to dominate other sectors, like video, maps, and news."

In short, Chrome data gave Google a massive competitive advantage, allowing them to profile users and understand their behavior better than any competitor could.

The Click Data Lie

Contrary to popular belief, advertising isn’t Google’s main product—search is. And to maintain their dominance in search, they need to deliver the best results every time. Chrome data may have been the secret weapon that has kept Google miles ahead of its competition. But one of the most valuable data points from Chrome is click data—the bridge between searchers and search results.

For example, let’s say you Google "running shoes" and click on a comparison guide. If 70% of users behave the same way, that’s a clear signal to Google that comparison guides are useful. Logically, Google should rank such pages higher. All this insight comes from a single click.

Yet Google denies using clicks in their ranking algorithm. In 2015, Gary Illyes, an analyst at Google, said using clicks directly in ranking would be a mistake. But leaked documents suggest otherwise. The system called Navboost helps Google learn patterns leading to successful searches, using click-through rate (CTR) data.

Google even provides CTR data for keywords in Google Search Console, and they don't deny its importance for YouTube videos. So, why lie about using clicks in search rankings? My best guess is that Google wants to prevent manipulation. If people knew clicks directly influenced rankings, click farms and bots would flood the system.

"If Google acknowledged clicks as a ranking factor, click farms would manipulate the system," said one SEO expert. "That’s why they deny it."

Domain Authority: The Hidden Metric

The next revelation comes from a controversy around Domain Authority, a metric pioneered by Rand Fishkin, which became a cornerstone for SEO professionals. Google has repeatedly denied using Domain Authority. Both Gary Illyes and John Mueller have stated that Google doesn’t use it. However, the leaked documents reveal a metric called site authority.

As Mike King pointed out, Google could be playing with semantics. They might deny using Moz’s Domain Authority metric specifically, but the concept of site authority does exist. According to the documents, site authority is tied to quality, not just backlinks.

"The site authority metric they had was in a section about quality. It wasn’t about links," King noted.

The debate continues, but the bottom line is clear: Google uses some form of site authority in their rankings, even if they won’t admit it publicly.

The Sandbox: SEO Purgatory

Finally, we arrive at the mysterious Google Sandbox, a theorized place where new websites lacking trust signals, like backlinks, were placed until Google could evaluate their quality. This concept was denied by Google for years. Matt Cutts in 2005, Gary Illyes in 2016, and John Mueller in 2019 all denied the existence of the Sandbox.

Yet, the leaked documents revealed an attribute called host stage, which is used to sandbox fresh spam and serving time. This revelation supports what many SEOs have suspected for years: new sites are often held back until they prove their worth.

Understanding the Deceptions

As I continued piecing this puzzle together, I realized that Google's public denials might not be outright lies but more of a strategy to deceive potential spammers. Google wants to keep people from gaming the system.

"Google’s public statements probably aren’t intentional efforts to lie, but rather to deceive potential spammers," said Mike King.

So, how should we, as content creators and SEO professionals, move forward knowing that we can’t take Google’s every word at face value?

Moving Forward: Test, Verify, and Share

The key takeaway is to test, verify, and share your findings with the SEO community. Google’s advice will always aim for the middle ground, as they can't be specific about every use case.

"We’ve got to test things ourselves," said one SEO expert. "And if Google contradicts themselves, we need to rely on the power of our community to refine our understanding."

In the end, it’s up to us to stay informed, adapt, and continue refining our SEO strategies despite Google's contradictions.