Google Confirms New Google Verified Badge for Local Services Ads via @sejournal, @brookeosmundson

Google just announced a new unifying identity for its Local Services Ads (LSAs) verification badges.

Called Google Verified, the badge will replace several different trust signals that advertisers and consumers have been seeing over the years.

This includes the Google Guaranteed, Google Screened, License Verified by Google, and the Money Back Guarantee program.

Starting in October 2025, eligible LSAs that pass the necessary screenings will display this streamlined mark: a single badge designed to communicate credibility in a more consistent way.

Why is Google Consolidating Badges?

In the past, Google’s verification system was fragmented.

Different types of businesses had different badges, and consumers were left guessing what each one actually meant. Was a “Screened” provider more trustworthy than a “Guaranteed” one? Did a license verification carry more weight than a money-back promise?

The lack of consistency made it harder for advertisers to explain their value and for consumers to make decisions.

By rolling everything into one identity, Google Verified aims to simplify the process for everyone involved.

The badge will not only appear across Local Service Ads but will also include transparency for consumers. When a user taps or hovers over the badge, they can see the specific checks a business has passed.

How Does This Change Impact Advertisers?

For marketers and business owners, the simplified badge system removes some of the confusion around what signals matter.

Instead of juggling multiple programs, the message is now clear: your business is either Google Verified, or it’s not.

That said, the bar for participation may feel higher. Businesses that don’t keep their documentation, licensing, and other requirements up to date risk losing the badge.

Since Google has indicated it may only show the badge when it predicts it will help users make decisions, credibility and visibility could become even more closely linked.

In short, advertisers who maintain verification stand to benefit from increased trust, while those who lag behind could see their ads appear less competitive.

This update doesn’t require marketers to overhaul their entire strategy by any means. However, there are a few practical steps you can take to ensure a smooth transition by October.

  • Review eligibility now. Make sure your licenses, insurance, and background checks are up-to-date before October.
  • Build in reminders. Treat verification like an ongoing compliance process, not a one-time task.
  • Educate clients or internal teams. If you manage LSA campaigns for others, help them understand that the badge isn’t just a cosmetic update. It reflects ongoing credibility.
  • Monitor performance post-launch. Once the new badge rolls out, watch for shifts in click-thru rate (CTR) and conversion rates. If verification gives a measurable lift, you’ll want to highlight that value in your reporting.

A Shift Toward Ongoing Trust

Google Verified may look like a rebrand on the surface, but it’s also a signal that trust in digital advertising is moving toward continuous validation.

For businesses, this means credibility is not something you earn once; it’s something you prove over and over again.

For advertisers, the key takeaway is simple: don’t treat this as a one-time update. Verification will become an expectation, not a nice-to-have, and it could influence not just how consumers view your ads but how often those ads are shown.

Google AI Mode Adds Agentic Booking, Expands To More Countries via @sejournal, @MattGSouthern

Google is adding agentic booking features to AI Mode in Search, beginning with restaurant reservations for U.S. Google AI Ultra subscribers enrolled in Labs.

What’s New

Booking Reservations

AI Mode can interpret a detailed request, check real-time availability across reservation sites, and link you to the booking page to complete the task.

For businesses, that shifts more discovery and conversion activity inside Google’s surfaces.

Robby Stein wrote on The Keyword:

“We’re starting to roll out today with finding restaurant reservations, and expanding soon to local service appointments and event tickets.”

Screenshot from: blog.google/products/search/ai-mode-agentic-personalized/, August 2025.

Planning Features

Google is introducing planning features that make results easier to share and tailor queries.

In the U.S., you can share an AI Mode response with others so they can ask follow-ups and continue research on their own, and you can revoke the link at any time.

Screenshot from: blog.google/products/search/ai-mode-agentic-personalized/, August 2025.

Separately, U.S. users who opt in to the Labs experiment can receive personalized dining suggestions informed by prior conversations and interactions in Search and Maps, with controls in Google Account settings.

How It Works

Under the hood, Google cites live web browsing via Project Mariner, partner integrations, and signals from the Knowledge Graph and Maps.

Named partners include OpenTable, Resy, Tock, Ticketmaster, StubHub, SeatGeek, and Booksy. Dining is first; local services and ticketing are next on the roadmap.

Availability

Availability is gated. Agentic reservations are limited to Google AI Ultra subscribers in the U.S. through the “Agentic capabilities in AI Mode” Labs experiment.

Personalization is U.S. and opt-in, with dining topics first. Link sharing is available in the U.S. Global access to AI Mode is expanding to more than 180 countries and territories in English, with additional languages planned.

Looking Ahead

AI Mode is moving from answer generation to task completion.

If your category relies on reservation or ticketing partners, verify inventory accuracy, hours, and policies now, and make sure your structured data and Business Profile attributes are clean.

Track how bookings and referrals appear in analytics as Google widens coverage to more tasks and regions.

Common Hosting Defenses Ineffective Against WordPress Threats via @sejournal, @martinibuster

Patchstack published a case study that examined how well Cloudflare and other general firewall and malware solutions protected WordPress websites from common vulnerability threats and attack vectors. The research showed that while general solutions stopped threats like SQL injection or cross-site scripting, a dedicated WordPress security solution consistently stopped WordPress-specific exploits at a significantly higher rate.

WordPress Vulnerabilities

Due to the popularity of the WordPress platform, WordPress plugins and themes are a common focus for hackers, and vulnerabilities can quickly be exploited in the wild. Once proof-of-concept code is public, attackers often act within hours, leaving website owners little time to react.

This is why it is critical to be aware of the security provided by a web host and of how effective those solutions are in a WordPress environment.

Methodology

Patchstack explained their methodology:

“As a baseline, we have decided to host “honeypot” sites (sites against which we will perform controlled pentesting with a set of 11 WordPress-specific vulnerabilities) with 5 distinct hosting providers, some of which have ingrained features presuming to help with blocking WordPress vulnerabilities and/or overall security.

In addition to the hosting provider’s security measures and third-party providers for additional measures like robust WAFs or other patching providers, we have also installed Patchstack on every site, with our test question being:

  • How many of these threats will bypass firewalls and other patching providers to ultimately reach Patchstack?
  • And will Patchstack be able to block them all successfully?”

Testing process

Each website was set up the same way, with identical plugins, versions, and settings. Patchstack used a “exploitation testing toolkit” to run the same exploit tests in the same order on every site. Results were checked automatically and by hand to see if attacks were stopped, and whether the block came from the host’s defenses or from Patchstack.

General Overview: Hosting Providers Versus Vulnerabilities

The Patchstack case study tested five different configurations of security defenses, plus Patchstack.

1. Hosting Provider A Plus Cloudflare WAF

2. Hosting Provider B + Firewall + Monarx Server and Website Security

3. Hosting Provider C + Firewall + Imunify Web Server Security

4. Hosting Provider D + ConfigServer Firewall

5. Hosting Provider E + Firewall

The result of the testing showed that the various hosting infrastructure defenses failed to protect the majority of WordPress-specific threats, catching only 12.2% of the exploits. Patchstack caught 100% of all exploits.

Patchstack shared:

“2 out of the 5 hosts and their solutions failed to block any vulnerabilities at the network and server levels.

1 host blocked 1 vulnerability out of 11.

1 host blocked 2 vulnerabilities out of 11.

1 host blocked 4 vulnerabilities out of 11.”

Cloudflare And Other Solutions Failed

Solutions like Cloudflare WAF or bundled services such as Monarx or Imunify failed to consistently address WordPress specific vulnerabilities.

Cloudflare’s WAF stopped 4 of 11 exploits, Monarx blocked none, and Imunify did not prevent any WordPress-specific exploits. Firewalls such as ConfigServer, which are widely used in shared hosting environments, also failed every test.

These results show that while those kinds of products work reasonably well against broad attack types, they are not tuned to the specific security issues common to WordPress plugins and themes.

Patchstack is created to specifically stop WordPress plugin and theme vulnerabilities in real time. Instead of relying on static signatures or generic rules, it applies targeted mitigation through virtual patches as soon as vulnerabilities are disclosed, before attackers can act.

Virtual patches are mitigation for a specific WordPress vulnerability. This offers protection to users while a plugin or theme developer can create a patch for the flaw. This approach addresses WordPress flaws in a way hosting companies and generic tools can’t because they rarely match generic attack patterns, so they slip past traditional defenses and expose publishers to privilege escalation, authentication bypasses, and site takeovers.

Takeaways

  • Standard hosting defenses fail against most WordPress plugin vulnerabilities (87.8% bypass rate).
  • Many providers claiming “virtual patching” (like Monarx and Imunify) did not stop WordPress-specific exploits.
  • Generic firewalls and WAFs caught some broad attacks (SQLi, XSS) but not WordPress-specific flaws tied to plugins and themes.
  • Patchstack consistently blocked vulnerabilities in real time, filling the gap left by network and server defenses.
  • WordPress’s plugin-heavy ecosystem makes it an especially attractive target for attackers, making effective vulnerability protection essential.

The case study by Patchstack shows that traditional hosting defenses and generic “virtual patching” solutions leave WordPress sites vulnerable, with nearly 88% of attacks bypassing firewalls and server-layer protections.

While providers like Cloudflare blocked some broad exploits, plugin-specific threats such as privilege escalation and authentication bypasses slipped through.

Patchstack was the only solution to consistently block these attacks in real time, giving site owners a dependable way to protect WordPress sites against the types of vulnerabilities that are most often targeted by attackers.

According to Patchstack:

“Don’t rely on generic defenses for WordPress. Patchstack is built to detect and block these threats in real-time, applying mitigation rules before attackers can exploit them.”

Read the results of the case study by Patchstack here.

Featured Image by Shutterstock/tavizta

Inspiro WordPress Theme Vulnerability Affects Over 70,000 Sites via @sejournal, @martinibuster

A vulnerability advisory was published for the Inspiro WordPress theme by WPZoom. The vulnerability arises due to a missing or incorrect security validation that enables an unauthenticated attacker to launch a Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF) attack.

Cross-Site Request Forgery (CSRF)

A CSRF vulnerability in the context of a WordPress site is an attack that relies on a user with admin privileges clicking a link, which in turn leverages that user’s credentials to execute a malicious action. The vulnerability has been assigned a CVSS threat rating of 8.1.

The advisory issued by Wordfence WordPress security company warned:

“This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to install plugins from the repository via a forged request granted they can trick a site administrator into performing an action such as clicking on a link.”

The vulnerability affects Inspiro theme versions up to and including 2.1.2. Users are advised to update their theme to the latest version.

Featured Image by Shutterstock/Kazantseva Olga

Google Quietly Announces Search Partner Network Placement Visibility via @sejournal, @brookeosmundson

Google quietly rolled out a change advertisers have wanted for years: site-level reporting for the Search Partner Network.

Until now, advertisers could only opt in or out, with little understanding of where their ads actually showed.

This update finally gives visibility into where budgets are spent outside of Google.

Google lists this as an August 2025 update in its Help Center, however it wasn’t announced widespread.

Read on to understand the update from Google, how advertisers are reacting, and what you can do with this new level of information.

What Changed in Search Partner Reporting?

The new reporting applies to Search, Shopping, and App campaigns. You’ll now see which partner sites served your ads and how many impressions each one received.

Think of it as the kind of placement data we already get in Performance Max, just extended to Search Partners.

This update follows other moves Google has made to address long-standing concerns about partner quality.

Earlier this year, they introduced brand safety pre-screening options with IAS, DoubleVerify, and Zefr. They also said parked domains will be opted out by default before the end of 2025.

This visibility layer feels like the missing piece that makes the rest of those updates more usable.

How Are Advertisers Reacting to This Update?

The update on Search Partner Network reporting was first found by Anthony Higman, who took to X (formerly Twitter) to share his opinion.

Higman stated:

Still Most Likely Wont Be Participating In The Search Partner Network But This Is Unprecedented And What ALL Advertisers Have Been Requesting For Decades! Honestly NEVER Thought I Would See This Day.”

Others gave some versioning mixture of applauding Google for giving data to advertisers that they’ve been asking for for years, while also being somewhat skeptical.

Mike Ryan replied to Higman with his thoughts:

I mean, good step but also, it’s the PMax version: impression data only.

Aaron Levy shared his thoughts on LinkedIn, stating that this is a major step in the right direction for Google.

Why This Matters & How to Take Action

Without Search Partner Network reporting, it was tough to justify opting in. Now advertisers finally have data to audit where ads run, decide if it fits brand standards, and see if partner traffic adds any real value.

That said, the update is only as good as the action that advertisers take with the information available.

Some sites won’t align with brand guidelines. Others may generate clicks but fail to drive quality conversions.

The difference is you can now point to actual data when making decisions, rather than relying on gut feel.

Here’s some quick pointers to make this update actionable:

  • Run a quick placement audit. Pull the report and check for sites that don’t align with your brand. Exclude what’s clearly not a fit.
  • Look beyond impressions. While this reporting is only limited to impressions, use your own conversion data to figure out which placements are driving useful traffic versus noise.
  • Revisit opt-in of campaigns. Many advertisers avoided Search Partners altogether because of the black box. Now it may be worth testing again, but do it with defined guardrails and success metrics.
  • Pressure test Smart Bidding. Google leans on Smart Bidding to balance Search Partner performance, but don’t assume it’s perfect. Keep an eye on conversion quality and modeled conversions before scaling.

Final Thoughts

If you’ve been skeptical of Search Partners, this update is a chance to take another look with data on your side.

If you’ve already been opted in, you finally have a way to prove which placements help your campaigns and which ones don’t.

Bottom line: advertisers now have a long overdue view into the Search Partner Network. With more visibility comes a bit more control, and smarter conversations about whether Search Partners deserve a place in your Search campaigns.

Will you be opting into Search Partner Network with this new reporting update?

Ahrefs Launches Tracker Comparing ChatGPT & Google Referral Traffic via @sejournal, @MattGSouthern

Ahrefs released a public dashboard that tracks how much referral traffic websites receive from Google Search versus ChatGPT, with monthly updates.

The first dataset covers three complete months across 44,421 sites connected to Ahrefs’ free Web Analytics tool.

The Early Numbers

For July, the dashboard reports Google at 41.9% of total web traffic across the cohort and ChatGPT at 0.19%.

Month over month, Google grew 1.4% and ChatGPT grew 5.3%.

The prior month showed the reverse pattern: Google +6.8% and ChatGPT +1.6%. These swings show growth rates can vary by month even as Google’s share remains far larger. Ahrefs Traffic Analysis

The dashboard states:

“ChatGPT is growing 3.8x faster than Google.”

It adds:

“With 5.3% monthly growth vs Google’s 1.4% in the latest month, AI-powered search continues to evolve rapidly.”

And:

“ChatGPT now drives measurable referral traffic to websites, representing a new channel that didn’t exist 2 years ago.”

How The Data Is Collected

To keep the time series comparable, the tracker includes only sites that appear in all months. As the page explains:

“Our analysis tracks sites that appear in all months, ensuring statistically significant and reliable growth metrics.”

The page also lists the last update timestamp and confirms monthly updates.

Important Caveats

The dashboard measures referral traffic that arrives with a referrer.

Some AI systems and in-app browsers add noreferrer or otherwise strip referrers, which can undercount AI-originating visits.

Ahrefs has documented this analytics blind spot when measuring AI assistants and Google’s AI Mode. Keep that limitation in mind when comparing “AI search” activity to traditional search.

Scope matters too. The cohort is limited to sites using Ahrefs Web Analytics. Earlier Ahrefs research across different samples found AI referrals around 0.17% of the average site’s traffic, which is directionally consistent with the 0.19% shown here.

Looking Ahead

Google still sends the overwhelming share of visits in this dataset, and that reality should anchor your priorities. At the same time, ChatGPT’s July growth suggests an emerging, measurable channel you can evaluate with real data.

Use the tracker to watch how both lines move over time and adjust your testing accordingly.


Featured Image: JRdes/Shutterstock

WordPress Contact Form 7 Redirection Plugin Vulnerability Hits 300k Sites via @sejournal, @martinibuster

A vulnerability advisory was issued for a WordPress Contact Form 7 add-on plugin that enables unauthenticated attackers to “easily” launch a remote code execution. The vulnerability is rated high (8.8/10) on the CVSS threat severity scale.

Screenshot from Wordfence advisory showing 8.8 CVSS severity rating

Redirection for Contact Form 7 plugin

The vulnerability affects the Redirection for Contact Form 7 WordPress plugin, which is installed on over 300,000 websites. The plugin extends the functionality of the popular Contact Form 7 plugin. It enables a website publisher not only to redirect a user to another page but also to store the information in a database, send email notifications, and block spammy form submissions.

The vulnerability arises in a plugin function. WordPress functions are PHP code snippets that provide specific functionalities. The specific function that contains the flaw is called the delete_associated_files function. That function contains an insufficient file path validation flaw, which means it does not validate what a user can input into the function that deletes files. This flaw enables an attacker to specify a path to a file to be deleted.

Thus, an attacker can specify a path (such as ../../wp-config.php) and delete a critical file like wp-config.php, clearing the way for a remote code execution (RCE) attack. An RCE attack is a type of exploit that enables an attacker to execute malicious code remotely (from anywhere on the Internet) and gain control of the website.

The Wordfence advisory explains:

“This makes it possible for unauthenticated attackers to delete arbitrary files on the server, which can easily lead to remote code execution when the right file is deleted (such as wp-config.php).”

The vulnerability affects all versions of the plugin up to and including version 3.2.4. Users of the affected plugin are advised to update the plugin to the latest version.

Featured Image by Shutterstock/Everyonephoto Studio

Breaking Down Optmyzr’s Study on Amazon’s Exit from Google Ads via @sejournal, @brookeosmundson

Just under one month ago, on July 23, 2025, Amazon vanished from Google Shopping ads overnight.

No trial, no warning, no phased retreat. One of the biggest advertisers on the platform simply stepped back, leaving a noticeable gap in auctions.

For many retailers, this shift opened the door to new opportunities. It’s tempting to think they would breathe easier: less competition, lower costs, more conversions.

But as Fred Vallaeys puts it, the reality is more nuanced: “more volume, less value.” 

Optmyzr’s study eludes that those opportunities since Amazon’s exit didn’t always translate into stronger performance. Read on to further explore Optmyzr’s findings on the great Amazon exit.

Key Findings from Optmyzr’s Study on Amazon Leaving Google Ads

Optmyzr compared performance across two matched weeks: July 23-29, 2025 vs. July 16-22, 2025.

They made sure to exclude Prime Day and matching days to isolate the effect of Amazon’s exit.

The findings were significant in major metric categories, including:

  • Impressions +5%
  • Clicks +7.8%
  • Cost -1%
  • Avg. CPC -8.3%

This first set of pre-click metrics looked promising for many retailers. But what about conversions?

That data told another story:

  • Conversion volume stayed flat
  • Conversion Value -5.5%
  • Conversion Rate -7.2%
  • ROAS -4.4%

What does this mean? Ads got cheaper and drew more clicks as a result of Amazon leaving Google Ads. But overall, it brough in less value to retailers.

The ‘Volume Trap’ Defined

Why did conversions fall even as traffic increased? The answer lies in expectations.

Amazon‑seeking shoppers clicked competitor ads but still expected Amazon-level pricing, quick shipping, and seamless service.

When most brands couldn’t meet that bar, conversions and value slipped. That’s the classic “volume trap”: traffic that looks good on the surface but doesn’t deliver the bottom-line results.

Vallaeys elaborated more on the volume trap, explaining why it happens and how to escape the volume trap.

The volume trap happens when advertisers get excited about more traffic but don’t stop to ask whether those clicks are truly valuable. Driving incremental volume is often not difficult (especially if you’re willing to accept lower-value traffic) but the real question is whether that traffic can actually convert profitably.

When Amazon exited Google Ads, we observed shoppers clicking on competitor ads for the same products but then bouncing back to Amazon. Why? Because Amazon has built unmatched trust with consumers: fast Prime shipping, predictable pricing, and a familiar checkout experience. That shows us that you can’t just replace the clicks and expect the same outcome. If your value proposition doesn’t align with what consumers expect, you may see more traffic but not more revenue.

To escape this trap, advertisers need to reframe their strategy. Instead of chasing short-term click growth, they should focus on positioning themselves differently. That might mean emphasizing local sourcing, higher-quality products, or a more personal experience. These are factors that Amazon can’t replicate. It also means looking beyond the immediate conversion. Even if you don’t win the sale today, you can start building a relationship that leads to long-term customer loyalty.

The real key is shifting the mindset: don’t just measure success by volume. Measure it by the value of the relationships you create.

To summarize the volume trap, what Optmyzr showed in their study is that more clicks don’t automatically equal more revenue. If you can’t compete with Amazon-like qualities (price, shipping, etc.), lean into what makes your offer unique and build relationships that pay off in the long run.

Which Categories Gained and Which Struggled After Amazon’s Exit

Not every category reacted the same way. Some thrived, while others got stuck in the volume trap:

  • Electronics: The standout success story. Clicks +11.5%, Conversions +81.3%, Conversion Value +10.9%, ROAS +7.1%, and all with lower CPCs.
  • Home & Garden: Traffic surged (+13.1%), but Conversion Value dropped 7.5%, ROAS -7.7%. More volume, but less value per sale.
  • Sporting Goods: Conversions rose 20.7%, but value declined nearly 10%. Shoppers likely bought lower-priced items or held back because they couldn’t find Amazon-level deals.
  • Health & Beauty: Conversions increased 14.6%, but conversion value essentially flat (+0.3%), ROAS up only slightly. Gains were masked by low-value purchases.
  • Tools & Hardware, Apparel & Accessories, Arts & Entertainment, Furniture, Vehicles & Parts: All showed some version of the volume trap: modest increases in clicks or conversions, but declining value and ROAS.

What This Means for Advertisers Managing Google Shopping Campaigns

Optmyzr’s data showed what happened when Amazon suddenly stepped out of the picture: cheaper clicks, more traffic, but ultimately lower value.

That’s the data side of the story.

Where marketers need to lean in is interpreting what that really means for account management.

Optmzyr’s takeaways give some practical perspectives for advertisers to think about.

  • Volume doesn’t always equal victory. More clicks might look great on the surface, but if those shoppers aren’t buying (or if they’re buying lower-ticket items), the net impact on your business can be negative. This isn’t something Optmyzr explicitly called out, but it’s the natural next step in interpreting their findings.
  • Category context is critical when evaluating success. Optmyzr highlighted Electronics as a category that saw improved conversions and ROAS. Why? Because those retailers could match or even surpass Amazon on fulfillment, trust, and pricing. If you’re in a category where you can’t deliver the same level of convenience, you’re more likely to see the opposite effect.
  • Measure what matters to your business. The study found that impressions, clicks, and traffic volume all increased. But the metrics that matter (conversion value and ROAS) told a different story. That’s the reminder for advertisers: make sure your optimizations focus on value, not vanity metrics.
  • Differentiate of risk being forgotten. If you can’t compete with Amazon on price or logistics, your advantage has to come from somewhere else. That could be curated products, specialty expertise, or building a stronger brand identity.

How to Communicate these Changes to Leadership

Major changes in the SERPs can cause some knee-jerk reactions to advertisers.

But once you have those changes under control, how do you explain this fundamental shift to leadership?

Vallaeys offered his take and recommendations on how PPC managers can craft the conversation.

When talking to executives, the key is to frame the story in business outcomes, not marketing jargon. Most C-suite leaders don’t care about CPCs, impression share, or auction dynamics. But they absolutely care about revenue, profit, and the quality of customers being acquired.

So, instead of saying ‘our clicks went up but our ROAS went down,’ you might say: ‘We gained more traffic after Amazon left the auction, but much of that traffic didn’t convert as profitably because customers expected Amazon-level pricing and delivery that we couldn’t match.’ That ties the marketing story directly to financial outcomes they already think about every day.

It also helps to remind executives that these dynamics aren’t random: they’ve experienced the same challenges competing against Amazon before. If you didn’t have the lowest price or fastest shipping then, those factors don’t magically go away just because Amazon paused ads. This makes it easier for them to understand why extra clicks don’t necessarily mean extra profit.

By anchoring the conversation in the language of business value rather than marketing metrics, PPC pros can build credibility and keep executives aligned on realistic expectations.

So don’t talk about CPCs, but talk about revenue and profit. The C-suite cares about business outcomes, not auction mechanics.

Will Amazon Return to Google Ads Soon?

Since Amazon has left Google Ads so abruptly, it begs the question: will they be returning anytime soon?

I asked Vallaeys on his perspective of the possibility. He stated:

It’s impossible to know exactly how long Amazon will stay out of Google Ads, but we can make some educated guesses. One possibility is that they’re testing incrementality: pausing ads to see how much business Google truly drives versus organic or other channels. Another is operational: after a strong Prime Day, they may be letting inventory rebalance before reinvesting. Given the timing, it would be surprising if they didn’t return for the holiday season, especially Black Friday and Cyber Monday, when they typically maximize their marketing push.

If and when Amazon comes back, advertisers should focus on fundamentals. That means managing budgets carefully to make sure spend is allocated to the areas with the highest potential, and leaning on smart bidding to ensure that the clicks you do buy are meeting profitability targets. Performance monitoring and conversion tracking need to be absolutely solid so automated systems have the right data to optimize against.

To sum up, there’s no way to truly know what Amazon’s next move on Google will be (or won’t be). But, advertisers and retailers alike can use this opportunity to give a renowned focus on the basics of advertising.

Lessons Beyond the Traffic Spike

Amazon’s sudden exit from Google Shopping ads shattered the comfortable assumption that less competition equals better returns.

What followed wasn’t universal lift. It was more like a complicated shuffle, where brands saw more traffic but not necessarily more profit.

Use this moment as a reminder: measure what matters. Traffic and impressions are only valuable insofar as they drive conversions worth your cost.

In some categories, you can meet Amazon head-on (like Electronics). At most, you’d be wiser to double down on what makes your business unique, and invest in customers who value your story, service, and specialization, not just a bargain.

You can read Optmyzr’s full study here.

Google: Why CrUX & Search Console Don’t Match On Core Web Vitals via @sejournal, @MattGSouthern

Google’s Barry Pollard recently explained why website owners see different Core Web Vitals scores in Chrome User Experience Report (CrUX) versus Google Search Console.

The short answer: both tools can be correct because they measure different things.

Pollard addressed the issue on Bluesky after questions about sites showing 90% “good” page loads in CrUX but only 50% “good” URLs in Search Console. His explanation can help you decide which metrics matter for your SEO work.

CrUX vs. Search Console

CrUX and Search Console measure performance differently.

CrUX counts page views and reflects how real Chrome users experience your site across visits. Every visit is a data point. If one person hits your homepage ten times, that’s ten experiences counted.

In Pollard’s words:

“Most CrUX data is measured by ‘page views’.”

He added:

“Users can visit a single page many times, or multiple pages once. 90% of your ‘page views’ may be the home page.”

Search Console works differently. It evaluates individual URLs and groups similar pages, giving you a template-level view of page health across the site. It’s a different lens on the same underlying field data sourced from CrUX.

Google’s documentation confirms: CrUX is the official Web Vitals field dataset, and the Core Web Vitals report in Search Console is derived from it and presented at the URL/group level.

Why Both Metrics Matter

Should you focus on page views or individual pages? That depends on your goals.

Pollard puts the choice on you:

“Should you care about ‘page views’ or ‘pages’? Well that’s up to you!”

High-traffic pages affect more people, so they often deserve first priority. They also tend to run faster because they get more attention and caching.

But don’t ignore slower pages. As Pollard suggested:

“Maybe they’d be visited more if not so slow?”

The best approach uses both views. Keep popular pages fast for current visitors, and improve slower sections to raise overall site quality and discoverability.

Action plan

When CrUX looks good but Search Console shows many problem URLs, it usually means your most-visited pages are fine while long-tail sections need work. That’s useful direction, not a conflict.

Start with the pages that drive the most sessions and revenue, then work through other templates so URL-level health catches up. As you assess changes, always check what each tool is counting and over which time window.

Looking ahead

Don’t panic when the numbers don’t align. They’re showing you different views of the same reality: user experiences (CrUX) and page health by URL/group (Search Console). Use both to guide your roadmap and reporting.

OpenAI Announces Low-Cost Subscription Plan: ChatGPT Go via @sejournal, @martinibuster

OpenAI is rolling out a new subscription tier called ChatGPT Go, a competitively priced version that will initially be available only to users in India. It features ten times higher message limits, ten times more image generations, and file uploads than the free tier.

ChatGPT Go

OpenAI is introducing a new low-cost subscription plan that will be available first in India. The cost of the new subscription tiere is 399 Rupees/month (GST included). That’s the equivalent of $4.57 USD/month.

The new tier includes everything in the Free plan plus:

  • 10X higher message limits
  • 10x more image generations
  • 10x more file uploads
  • Twice as much memory

According to Nick Turley of ChatGPT:

“All users in India will now see prices for subscriptions in Indian Rupees, and can now pay through UPI.”

OpenAI’s initial announcement shared availability details:

“Available on web, mobile (iOS & Android), and desktop (macOS & Windows).

ChatGPT Go is geo-restricted to India at launch, and is able to be subscribed to by credit card or UPI.”

Featured Image by Shutterstock/JarTee