If article marketing REALLY worked...

You're not comparing organic search results to sponsored ads, are you? Correct me if I'm wrong but Google Adwords customers have a strong commercial interest with their ads.

Have you ever told a friend or colleague to "Google it" and recommend they look at the sponsored ads? Heck, have YOU ever Googled a legitimate search term and use the ads as your information source/search results?

Yet, a lot of people here would believe that they can "dominate" Google's front page! :rolleyes: Imagine for a minute if that were TRUE! WebMD is a pretty popular high-end site so why is it that they don't dominate Google whenever someone searches for a disease, procedure, or the side effects of medicine? The moment that happened, people would start to complain that WebMD paid Google big $$$ to be all over the front page! Then people would start clicking on page 2, 3, 4, etc to find other points of view because (as everyone knows) it's never good to trust 1 source.

To make things simple, who can you point out that is dominating Google with article marketing (or video, etc)?

They can't do a complete turnaround and base all results on this. That's because people still use shared computers and shared networks. Think of all the schools and colleges that have computers. Think of all the families that share one computer. In less fortunate countries, many people share the same computer.

Not all the users will search the same way for information. Google will have to continue its current algorithm to some degree. It can't base all its information on search history and preferences, because that will be skewed.

Hey, thanks for the link! I also see results from YouTube, a couple of .edu, a usda.gov site, etc.

You're right, "legitimate" is open to interpretation. I guess I'm thinking about searching for movie times, looking for a new doctor, reading the news, getting directions, learning how to "do" something like fix a faucet, shopping, etc. I'm not implying that Google is hurting when it comes to quality search results but what I am saying is article marketing isn't what people think it is.

In our turkey example, we see a diverse set of results (thankfully). I know that when I Google that term I will be presented with various websites, some professional and some that look basic.

I know there are people writing ebooks and making $$$ on this kind of stuff so it may ruffle feathers. I know that PLR sites count on people to buy their articles, so it's kinda a snowball effect.

Your confusing "Relevancy" with "User Intent" a common mistake made by a lot of IM'ers almost every time they conduct keyword research.
As the major Search Engines evolve they have as a task the ability of determining the "intent" of the user when he entered a query into their systems. "User Intent" is a key component of supplying the searcher with a result set relevant to that intent. Each Search Engine has found over the course of years that this is a daunting task and lacked a solid basis in research and technologies. There are inherent shortcomings that make it so.

They are limited to relying on the data from transaction logs which are excellent for collecting large amounts of data from a large number of users engaged in real search tasks. However, they do not have direct access to these users. They can only infer intent from the available data. That said there is a protocol in place based upon academic research that has laid a foundation for creating a better understanding of "User Intent". User Intent is classified under this protocol into three distinct query classifications.



1. Informational

2. Navigational

3. Transactional



The Jansen and Spink Report (2005) shows us that query characteristics across search engines are amazingly consistent. The current best understanding of User Intent shows us that %76 of search queries can safely be classified into 1 of the above categories. Further more 75% of these queries are informational, 10% each show themselves to be navigational or transactional. (Jansen, 2008)


Caution should be used when attempting to classify User Intent because a single query may have multiple motivations behind it, Informational and Transactional as an example. Further research is called for either by applying naive Bayes Classifiers (Naive Bayes classifiers are among the most successful known algorithms for learning to classify text documents) and/or data mining algorithms to arrive at a probability of classifying a query into one or more categories. This research and it's application is an ongoing process as the Search Engines mature and build these variables into their algorithms.

Keyword Research is merely an attempt to discover the language or word set of the search query performed by the user and Internet Marketers are quick to make unfounded leaps and assumptions (usually unconsciously) with the discovery of these search query keywords as to the intent of the user when in fact the nature of this relationship between keyword usage in search queries and User Intent is mostly unknown at this time. This has resulted in complex inefficiencies in the keyword research process and in the deployment of keyword sets in the marketing mix.

Article Marketing is a useful tool and has allowed wise IM'ers a basis for proper experimentation, evaluation and adjustments necessary to maximize the benefit of targeting "User Intent" and providing a measurable "ROI" while making they're marketing more efficient.
PR: wait... I: wait... L: wait... LD: wait... I: wait...wait... C: wait... SD: wait...
[IMG]chrome://seoquake/content/skin/close.gif[/IMG]

Sal,

Where are you located?
We have an emerald (and 65 other naturally occurring gemstones) mine right here in Hiddenite, NC ... plus the rare Hiddenite! Geology/Mineralogy was my minor at Arizona State 10 years ago. (Physics was my major).

Sorry to go off-topic there folks ...


I'm wondering if the OP is trying to ask this ...

If article marketing is supposed to be one of THE ways to attract visitors to your website ... why aren't more articles being listed in search engine results for search terms? With so many articles written on a HUGE range of topics, surely nearly every search result would have articles listed on nearly every page.

Just curious if that is what the OP was driving at.
And if not, am curious about the answer caused I wondered about that.

Thank you, Sal. I will definitely have to give that a try.

That's very likely because it's a small search with a small amount of competition and marketers have figured out how to place really high in Google with "manageable" competition like that. This sounds exactly like what my experience with "sponsored results" (ie, PPC) has been. In my experience (with my searches), those have been just like you describe: webpages of links to this and that which showed quotes from their page but once you clicked on the info was absolutely nowhere to be found.