Taking It Personally: Google’s Personalized Search in 2007 vs. 2024, A Hamsterdam History Lesson

By Ethan Lazuk

Welcome to the first installment of Hamsterdam History!

In this initial lesson, we’ll look at a couple of vintage SEO articles from 2007, both about personalization in Google Search, and compare them to today.

The articles we’ll review were created by Danny Sullivan for Search Engine Land and EGOL for SEOmoz.

Since this is the first official Hamsterdam History article, the formatting, length, and style might be totally different from future articles.

The plan is to see what works for readers and go from there.

In general, a lesson I’ve learned for my blog over the past 6 months or so is to make articles more skimmable — perhaps we could reference the page experience criterion that pertains to easily locating the main content, as well.

You see, my instinct is to write articles that get read top to bottom, like a story, but the lesson I learned is that it’s often better to have conveniently digestible sections.

So naturally, this first article is written like it should be read top to bottom. 😉

That said, if you want to skim, we’ll have:

• A brief introduction about choosing the topic
• An analysis of the vintage 2007 articles
• An outro looking at personalization in 2024

Feel free to leave comments at the end, as well, or contact me with feedback.

Choosing personalization as a topic

For the first Hamsterdam History article, I wanted to look at a Moz post.

Why Moz?

Well, when I was first learning SEO early on at agencies, I was given a lot of Moz content in trainings, and even used its tools before Ahrefs or Semrush, so it has some nostalgia.

SEOmoz, which was rebranded as Moz in 2013, was originally a blog that began in 2004. More of its history is explained in this 2013 post by Rand Fishkin.

One of the earlier blog posts I found on Wayback Machine for the domain (www.seomoz.org) was “Two Cents on Personalized Search,” written by EGOL on February 5th, 2007 and first archived 3 days later:

We’ll get into the article’s contents shortly.

But first, who is EGOL, you may ask?

I’m not totally sure.

They’re listed as a Premium Member who was a “Webmaster for several retail and academic portal websites.”

I wasn’t sure if that profile photo was real, so I put it into Google Lens to see if I could use reverse image search, but no such luck:

Though I did find some nice vintage ties by default:

What’s fortunate is Moz still maintains EGOL’s user page.

You can find their posts there going back to 2005; they were last active in 2021.

Interestingly, their favorite thing about SEO is listed as:

“1) The intellectual war against multiple competitors in a melee that carries on for years. 2) Piercing the armor of billion dollar companies. 3) Building the armor-piercing arrows and letting loose…”

That’s pretty awesome.

But I also wonder if the theme of competition is more prevalent with past eras.

It was also mentioned in another historical post I did about an article in 2011, where the author spoke about how, “there’ll be someone out there who has more money to burn, is tougher, is smarter, or is sneakier than you.”

In our present era, I don’t see a lot of this narrative about outsmarting your competition, but rather the focus is on satisfying your users.

Then again, I’m sure it’s still a prevalent refrain in certain corners, but it does feel like a different mindset on the whole.

Also, if anyone knows EGOL, please tag them for me. 🙂

Now, within EGOL’s post were several comments, one of which linked to a Search Engine Land article published three days earlier (February 2nd, 2007) by Danny Sullivan.

The article is called “Google Ramps Up Personalized Search,” and it was first archived on February 5th, 2007:

Let’s take a look through both articles, pull out the highlights, and then compare their information to today’s era of Search.

Examining personalization from Google circa 2007

Since Danny’s article came before EGOL’s and is more of a guide than an opinion piece, we’ll review that one first.

“Google Ramps Up Personalized Search” – Danny Sullivan, SEL

Danny’s article starts out by explaining that Google is updating its approach to personalization:

“Google is stepping up the push into personalized search results. A new change announced today should cause many more people to take up the service.”

He links to an official announcement from the Google Blog.

Now, this made me laugh.

Google’s blog was a subdomain on blogspot.com.

If you’ve ever looked around a Semrush toxic link report, you’ll know why that’s funny.

Anyway, let’s check out the announcement in full, while we’re at it.

It was published February 2nd, 2007 by Sep Kamvar and Marissa Mayer and archived 6 days later:

It starts out by explaining how Google has “two main ways of personalizing your Google experience” in an effort to “improve the quality of your search results.”

This included personalizing your homepage as well as “automatic personalization through things like personalized search and recommendations.”

The announcement is for a further step, “combining these two into a single signed-in experience.”

It also gives an interesting example, where SEP says his search results for [dolphin] would learn to return the NFL team, whereas someone else’s might return the sea mammal.

The way not to see personalized results is to log out of your Google Account.

Now, many of us do a similar trick today — we search logged in and then use an incognito browser (logged out) to see how the results may change.

As for a customized Google homepage, there’s some ability to customize your Chrome tabs on desktop. I’ve never messed with this, but you can see I have a lot of suggestions here:

But really what the personalized homepage describes eluded me. Danny’s article discusses it, with widgets and bookmarks, but to me it sounded more akin to today’s mobile experience with a Google app.

I did find this screenshot from a 2007 article on TechRepublic, so I’m assuming this is it:

Now returning to Danny’s article, he goes on to say how personalized search, in particular, marks a sea change in SEO from when all searchers saw the same results:

“In turn, the growth of personalized search should have a dramatic impact on search marketers as the days of “same results, all around” eventually come to an end.”

He goes into some of the details about signing up for personalization and references a banner in Search. I think the banner screenshot is pretty cool for giving us historical context on the period, so here it is:

In addition to signing up for personalized search and the personalized homepage, opting in also enrolled a user in Google search history.

He goes on to explain about this feature “introduced back in April 2005 that keeps track of every search you’ve made and page you’ve clicked on from Google search results.”

We’ll see in the outro later how this looks today (as Data & privacy settings).

Apparently the previous year (2006), there was a leak of search user history by AOL — the first internet service I remember my family having via dial-up on a Compaq computer from Costco in Helena, Montana — which gave an added air of caution to such features:

“In the wake of last year’s search history leak from AOL, more and more people are becoming sensitive to what Google in particular and search engines in general record. They may not want search information stored. But now, Google’s doing it automatically if they enroll in any Google service, unless they specifically opt-out.”

You can read more about the “AOL search log release” here on Wikipedia, which apparently involved no user data but rather search query logs with PII — the kind Google Search Console might filter out as anonymized queries today.

Danny goes on to explain more about how to opt out of search history.

It’s also fun to read his remarks where he critiques a Google policy, like here:

“Be aware that while deleting wipes out material from your search history (and keeps it from being used in personalized search), Google says the records are still kept in some form. That’s something I’d like to see changed.”

In his replies on X as Google’s Search Liaison today, he often speaks about something he’s “pushed for” or would like to see happen, so I can just imagine his advocacy behind the scenes.

Anyway, he goes on to speak about personalized search results, which debuted in June 2005 in their then-current form:

“Your search history records are big part of powering the second service I mentioned from Google, Google Personalized Search. I like the service a lot. The current version rolled out in June 2005, and I’ve found it often improves my results in subtle ways.”

He then goes on to explain about what informs personalized search.

I find it retroactively refreshing how open Google must have been about discussing these factors, yet growing up in a more hushed and machine learning-driven era — so to speak 😉 — I also feel a bit weird when signals are discussed, even if they are just for personalization in these cases:

“From talking with Google — and from my own experiences — personalized search reshapes your results primarily by noting the types of sites you select from the search results. That allows Google to look at those sites and then give them a boost in the rankings, especially if you visit them often. In addition, Google can determine sites and pages that seem related to those you are already visiting, in order to give them a boost.

Beyond your search history, Google also looks at the content on your Google Personalized Homepage – what gadgets you have there, feeds you are reading and so on — in order to shape your personalized search results. This is a new signal they’ve just started to use. Another new signal is Google Bookmarks. Pages you save in these also influence the results. In case you’re wondering, your email in Gmail does NOT have an impact, as Google explains here.”

Of course, the impact isn’t huge:

“My search history makes all this happen. As I said, it’s subtle, not massive. Many queries aren’t changed at all, Google said. For those that are, there are generally slight shifts in the rankings.”

But I imagine the joys this creates for rank tracking.

He goes on to discuss this in a more general theme:

“This means the days of everyone seeing the same results for any particular query are growing more numbered. What’s number one for one person might be number three for another and not even show up in the top ten for yet another.”

Danny’s conclusion is that personalized results are beneficial:

“The change is good news for searchers. It’s also good news for site owners with good content, who should get rewarded by visits.”

He also quotes Larry Page’s enthusiasm from an earlier earnings call:

“We already got a hint of this in Google’s earnings call this week. Personalization was touched on many times, probably most extensively by Google cofounder Larry Page, who talked about trying to increase it:

“We’re very excited about personalization. … Also the quality improvements we get with personalized search are also quite significant, and we’re very excited about that, and then that driving more search and more monetization and so on.””

Now, let’s take a look at EGOL’s article for SEOmoz from 3 days later on this same topic.

“Two Cents on Personalized Search” – EGOL, SEOmoz

Something Danny’s article mentioned is how the announced change by Google likely meant increased user rates of personalized search results through ease of access to opt in.

With that context, it’s interesting how EGOL’s article begins by referencing how uncommon consideration was for personalized search — something we take for granted today:

“Have you paid any attention to personalized search yet? … As your history grows Google starts to modify the SERPs that they send you in ways that they think will be more pleasing.

I first noticed this a few days ago when Google seemed to know which site belonged to me in the SERPs. When I searched for my main keyword I could see [homepage] in the SERPs right below my URL.”

He also mentioned something I didn’t recall from Danny’s article, which was about how to view your search history via a query:

“Also, if I query for “personalized search” and click the number 1 result (with a title tag of “Google Search History”) it also takes me to a page that displays my search history.”

Today we can go to https://myactivity.google.com/ to find this information.

But I wonder if the trick from 2007 still works …

In position 2, we get Google Search Help Center instructions with a link that takes us the Data & privacy page, mentioned later in the outro.

But I think EGOL was just referring to a normal web result, not some special way to get to your search history.

Anyway!

He then tells a joke about inflating his own site’s rankings:

“Before I understood what was going on I watched my sites climb higher and higher in the SERPs. I thought that I was getting kickass rankings! But it was simply the personalization and Google figuring out what kind of sites that I like.”

Funny enough, Danny also spoke about this in his article:

“I always joke that personalized search is also a good ego search reinforcer. People tend to go to their own sites often. That helps make your own site rank better in the results. This would happen to me with Google Personalized Search, and I’d get excited. Then I’d see the “Personalized Search” message and wonder if I’d still be there in regular results when I switched the results off.”

These days, I use my own site as an “SEO playground.” As a result, I often have to check incognito SERPs to ensure I’m not falling into that trap.

Similar advice was also given in 2007:

“This is just a warning that you should not order that new Porche if you see your site climbing the SERPs. It could be personalized search playing a trick on you.

Once you have accumulated a search history you can check how much it influences your SERPs by doing a search while logged into your Google account, logging out and then doing the same search. Bam! Immediately different. Now you see what every Joe Schmoe gets who does not log in to a Google account.”

The reference to a luxury car is interesting, as well. One of the criticisms of The Verge’s alligator article, for example, was the association of SEO with wealth.

We don’t see that mentioned as much today, at least in general circles, but maybe it was in a different era.

Speculation aside … here’s another contrast with our modern era …

EGOL next raises an interesting point about people complaining about personalized results.

“I’ve heard lots of people complaining about the personalized search being bad for SEOs.”

We saw how Danny welcomed it.

EGOL also welcomes it:

“My two cents on this is that it is a good thing. Why? Because it adds some diversity to the SERPs and gives your sites a chance to rank higher when Mrs. A searchs than it otherwise would rank. This should build a little diversity into your rankings portfolio. Diversity in your income stream is not a bad thing. And, if you are doing something really right, then your site might rank number 1 for everybody – no matter if their results are personalized or not.”

However, we do find evidence in each article’s comments that some SEOs were hesitant about personalized search.

Here’s one from Danny’s article by “graywolf”:

And here’s one in EGOL’s article by “vangogh99”:

Something I think our era can take away from these past commenters is that while they’re critical of the move by Google, they focus on the merits of the change, not the people behind it. 😉

Now, how closely does personalized search in 2007 compare to today?

Well, I think for starters, we have more of it.

Here are just some of the personalization examples that came to mind …

Personalization from Google today: an outro of observations

One of the coolest things going on in my life right now is my Google Discover feed.

Ok, that might sound kinda, erm, pathetic.

But it ain’t!

Here’s why …

Like I’m sure is true for many SEOs, there was a point in my career where I went from doing SEO to living it.

I can’t precisely say when it happened, but when you start living something, you go from having a casual interest in it to almost an obsessive habit of consuming content and information about it wherever you can.

In my case, that meant setting aside history books and news magazines and instead delving into SEO publications and Twitter/X.

But then something happened …

When ChatGPT, SGE, and Gemini burst onto the scene in recent years, I started realizing I lacked context.

If you asked me a new SEO question, I could identify a trustworthy source to find an answer.

However, if you asked me about AI, I’d be just as susceptible to misinformation as anyone else.

That’s where my more personalized Google Discover feed came into play.

My old Discover feed was stuff like celebrity gossip and weight loss secrets, which ensured there was exactly a 0.0001% chance I’d ever scroll through it.

That all changed, though, with the ability to follow topics.

Just like starting on a new social media site, it took a while to build up my preferences in Google Discover.

Once I got my feed personalized, though, I was discovering all sorts of new AI or machine learning sources.

Now, scrolling through Discover is something I look forward to each day, much like visiting a social media platform.

And when I hear the word “context,” my first association now is, “You mean, ‘context window‘?”

That’s one benefit of personalization.

But it doesn’t stop there.

Personalization within Google Search itself is also helpful.

Let’s say, for example, that I recently looked at a product on Walmart’s website, and now I want to find it again but I can’t recall the name.

I could retrace my steps, sure.

Or I could simply search for Walmart and get my last visited page(s) as sitelinks:

Since Google also knows my exact location is South Eola in Orlando, I can then simply search for the nearest Walmart to go purchase it:

Personalization impacts web rankings, as well.

On Google Search’s How Search Works page for Ranking Results, it lists five factors, including query meaning, document relevance, quality, and usability, as well as user context.

In terms of context, Google can take “your location, past Search history, and Search settings” into account when ranking results:

“Search also includes some features that personalize results based on the activity in your Google account. For example, if you search for “events near me” Google may tailor some recommendations to event categories we think you may be interested in.”

To enable these settings in the Google app (on iOS) for instance, there’s this option to show personal results:

You might find that some results are now personalized to you, using the About this result feature to check:

If we’re tracking the position of those results, this personalization would add an interesting dynamic into that mix — yet another reason why SEO’s “still” should fixate on keyword rankings. 😉

It doesn’t stop there, either.

Personalized results also enabled us to receive push notifications for articles that Google thinks we’d find interesting:

(That’s also a great “vintage” TOOL song, by the way.)

And speaking of music, I just recently got this notification (in the Google app) announcing new music from Black Sabbath:

The only part Google got wrong is that I prefer the original Ozzy era. 😉

Personalization also goes beyond Search to other aspects of Google’s products.

For example, when I flew to Pubcon in March, I booked my flight using Google Flights, then I also added reminders to my Google Calendar (which saved me when I realized I mistook one of the flights for p.m. instead of a.m. and had to rebook).

And when my flight into Las Vegas was delayed, Google’s notifications let me know 3 minutes before the airline’s app and a good 10 or 15 minutes before the pilot announced it:

Personally, I’d rather have too much personalization than too little.

I mean, would you rather listen to FM radio’s top 100 or a Spotify playlist based on your liked songs?

That said, Google gives us control over some elements of personalization.

Your Google account has a Data & privacy section where you can view (or erase) all kinds of data, including your web activity, like queries searched and sites visited:

That’s also just a sampling of the ways personalization can impact us today.

What does Gemini say about it all?

Lastly for fun, let’s ask Google Gemini 1.5 Pro (via Google AI Studio) to look at the text of these two vintage articles from 2007 and explain how personalization with Google has changed since then.

Here’s what it had to say:

“While the core principles of personalization remain similar, Google’s approach has evolved considerably since 2007. Personalization is now more deeply integrated into all Google products and services, driven by sophisticated algorithms and a wider range of data sources. While this offers users a more relevant and convenient experience, it also raises concerns about privacy and presents new challenges for search marketers.”

Here are some of the specific differences Gemini laid out (with screenshots of the full details below):

• More data sources are used today, including location, browsing history, app, and even email content.
• More advanced algorithms are used today, including machine learning or AI for greater accuracy and nuance.
• It’s now the default experience even when users aren’t logged in. (For example, incognito searches still account for your location via IP address.)
• Users have more ways to manage their personalization preferences and data.
• SEOs have to think about more granular audiences now, especially with content marketing.
• Location personalization has given a rise to local SEO.
• Today’s public is more aware of data privacy, and the regulatory environment has changed, such as with GDPR and the CCPA.

Here’s the full Gemini answer with even more context on the differences between 2007 and 2024:

What might the future of personalization look like with SGE and other generative AI features?

We shall see!

“Lookin’ out my back door”

I hope you’ve enjoyed the first installment of Hamsterdam History!

And if you didn’t, never fear …

These will get better over time. 😉

Until the next installment, enjoy the vibes: