It is very rare for job boards to give out the address with the ad for a vacancy. For example, an advert will only say London (600 square miles) rather than Brick Lane, London or Oxfordshire (1,000 square miles) instead of Wildmere Close, Banbury.
No one is well served by missing this information from vacancy ads.
Candidates can't decide if they are interested in a position when they don't know where it is? Not knowing exactly where they'll commute to each morning dissuades many candidates from making applications while others fire a shot into the dark and hope for the best.
Companies waste time with applications from candidates who don't take the process further when the address is revealed.
Recruiters also waste time talking to candidates who will never be interested because of the location and I have even seen examples of candidates being talked into attending interviews before turning down an offer because the location was too impractical for them.
Why are locations hidden?
As we covered in #1/7 Right to know the employer's name recruiters protect their client list from competitors and candidates so they don't lose business. They avoid giving clues in their ads by being vague about the company's location.
The side effects
This practice reduces the quality of the average application by including candidates unavailable for a location. It puts off qualified local candidates who skip adverts because of the odds are that they are not in a relevant location for them.
The practice of automating searches, "job alerts/emails", is less valuable. False matches are sent to candidates because search engines are unable to narrowly target geographies.
The standards we all need
Greater transparency, by displaying the exact office location, will let candidates search by locality giving confidence that effort put into tailoring applications isn't being wasted.
A greater accuracy from job alerts will encourage candidates to set more up speculatively, knowing their time won't be wasted reading thru the matches.