Subscribe
Share
Share
Embed
Zero Click Marketing is a marketing strategy podcast about content marketing, audience research, and how brands grow when clicks matter less. Hosted by Amanda Natividad, Chief Evangelist at SparkToro and Co-Author of the book, "Zero Click Marketing," the show explores how marketers reach audiences, build influence, and earn attention in a zero-click internet. New to the show? Start with Episode 2: What Zero Click Marketing Actually Is.
Rand Fishkin (00:00):
All the things that happen in zero click environment will eventually lead to the same thing that clicks led to, which is someone who wants to buy some shoes will buy some shoes. Will they buy yours? That's determined by the environment of influence.
Amanda Natividad (00:14):
I'm Amanda Natividad and welcome to Zero Click Marketing. Rand, I'm nervous to interview you for my podcast.
Rand Fishkin (00:26):
I think you're required to say that. Yeah. I have a feeling that every podcast host who's ever talked to me says that. And I don't know why because have I ever been intimidating on a podcast?
Amanda Natividad (00:40):
I don't know because you're the digital marketing GOAT, so we are all nervous talking to you. I mean, I'm still nervous.
Rand Fishkin (00:49):
I see. If someone is accomplished in a field, then they must be intimidating in some way. I don't know. It sounds like patriarchy to me. Get out of here.
Amanda Natividad (00:55):
Oh, get out of here.
Rand Fishkin (00:59):
Sorry, this is your show. I don't know what's going on. This
Amanda Natividad (01:02):
Actually is a show about upholding the patriarchy, so I'm a little.
Rand Fishkin (01:06):
Oh yeah. That's why it says upholding the patriarchy with Amanda Nativida. You're going to get so much tariff money. It's going to be great.
Amanda Natividad (01:15):
It's going to be great. Everyone's going to love it, but actually they're going to hate it. It'd be great. No, but I do want to talk about obviously zero click marketing, but I thought this would be a fun episode because I really want to cover the executive buy-in angle with you because you are an executive and hopefully I think you speak executive speak. But one thing I want to unpack first is, so far in this podcast, we've talked about the problems that have come up in the recent, what, recent six to eight years that have caused the need for zero click marketing. So we talked about disappearing clicks, dark social, the rise of AI, blah, blah, blah. And then we've also talked about some ways to do zero click marketing. So sort of like here's the problem, here's a solution. So I'm curious to hear from you, when you talk to somebody who is bought in on zero click marketing, like the executive, the CMO, or even the CEO who generally agrees but doesn't know what to do next, what do you tell them?
(02:23):
What are some of the sort of mental models that you start with to help someone get more aligned with a zero click marketing strategy?
Rand Fishkin (02:30):
Yeah, I actually think 80 to 90% majority agree that it's real, that the problem is real, that it's actually happening, and that the big challenges are, okay, so what do I do and how do I prove that it's working? That's the hardest thing to overcome. And I think that requires two things. The answer to every marketing question, Amanda, as you know very well, is it depends. So it depends on your industry. It depends on what type of audience you're targeting. It depends on how you sell and who you're selling to. If you're a company that needs to sell hundreds of thousands of a product every week to sort of make your global minimums, you're going to behave ludicrously differently to someone who needs to sell one product a week B2C in a very bespoke context or enterprise SaaS where they need to close 10 deals a year to be a $50 million a year business.
(03:33):
It's totally different. The things that you should invest in are different. The ways you should measure it are different. The how you experiment is different. So that's a hard question to give one answer to.
Amanda Natividad (03:45):
Well, let's start talking about different ways to measure.
Rand Fishkin (03:50):
Okay.
Amanda Natividad (03:50):
I mean, because there are different ways to go about it and there isn't one size fits all, right? The whole it depends thing because it'll depend very much on, I think depends on your sort of sales cycle, how much your product is, whether it's a product or a service or software versus physical good versus service. I think those are all different. So maybe it's, how do you start thinking about measurement?
Rand Fishkin (04:21):
I think the biggest thing is to, after you've identified here is my ideal customer, here's what's going to sort of influence them to be aware of us and to want to buy from us. Now you're doing things to have that influence. Maybe that's something on social media, maybe it's conferences and events, maybe it's podcasts and webinars. Maybe it's in-person meetings that you set up through relationships, maybe it's PR. The list is so long. Yeah, it would take us the whole episode to get through. But once you've decided on that set of tactics that you want to try to influence that group, the next problem is saying, how do I prove to myself that it worked? And that's where you have to let go a little bit. You have to let go of the idea of proof. There will not be proof, especially if you're doing multiple things at the same time, which you probably should be.
(05:20):
For example, let's say, what was the shoe brand that you emailed me today?
Amanda Natividad (05:26):
Oh, it was Rothy'ses.
Rand Fishkin (05:27):
Yeah, Rothy's. Right. So let's say for example, that their CMO says, "Hey, we did this." I don't know how you heard about them, but let's say it's an influencer campaign and they reached out to you and they're like, "Hey, Amanda, would you cover us in, I don't know, your newsletter or your social or whatever?" And you said yes. How do they prove if I go and buy a pair of their shoes that it came from you and that it was part of that influencer program? They can't prove it. They can correlate it. They can time series it. They could do a geographical program where they're like, "Hey, we're going to do West Coast influencers. They're mostly connected to other West Coast people. They might be connected to some Canadians and some Mexicans and some people in Panama. And those sales will also come in, but we won't be able to prove it, but we're going to mostly focus on this.
(06:15):
And then we're going to see if time series lift happens in this geographic area after we do this campaign. And oh look, it did. So we probably think that this had this much lift or impact, but it could have been something else. Maybe you got featured in a big press piece at the same time. Maybe you suddenly started appearing in AI answers because ChatGPT retooled their model. Maybe Google's AI overview started featuring you. Who knows? You can't prove a tactic. And so instead what I'm doing is trying to convince executives that they have to go back in time to the same way they used to do marketing and their predecessors did marketing in the 20th century where they take bets on sources of influence. They have tactical impact, they measure the impact, and then they show correlation, not causation. And that is really uncomfortable for a lot of digital marketers.
Amanda Natividad (07:11):
What's interesting is I think what you're bringing up too is that's how they track success. I mean, at least in general or more broadly, that's how they track success for out-of-home advertising. For billboards, that was originally how they did it. I mean, obviously not originally, they didn't have digital dashboards or whatever, but I mean they would look at incremental lift in revenue in certain key regions where they had the billboards. And that's what they do today, just in a more modernized way.
Rand Fishkin (07:42):
Yeah. I mean, the frustrating part is somehow it is quite easy still to get a lot of big brands, especially to like, "Hey, you should buy a Super Bowl ad," or, "Hey, let's run a radio campaign. Let's do TV. Let's do out of home. Let's do print media or let's do a big Google ad spend." And those things, they seem to have this comfort level with. I'm saying Google, but I mean Google display. They seem to have this comfort level with, "Oh, those things are hard to measure. We're going to do correlation. It's lift-based." But then as soon as you flip the conversation to, "Hey, let's do an influencer campaign. Hey, let's do PR. Hey, let's do some whatever, SEO or AI SEO or content marketing." Suddenly their brain flips and they go, "Oh, everything must be perfectly attributed. You can't attribute it. I'm not going to invest in it.
(08:42):
Show me the referral traffic."
Amanda Natividad (08:46):
So there's something I've been thinking about that I've been. I've said it a couple times in presentations, but I haven't really fully wrapped my arms around it, which is really just thinking about leading and lagging indicators to help you gauge how well you're doing at things like zero-click marketing. So for a leading and lagging indicator might be. The leading one might be the thing that happens short term. So it might be you optimize a post for social, you optimize for it to get seen and to get commented on. So maybe a leading indicator would be what's the quality of discussion like? And quality meaning are people engaging with the content in the way that they're meant to? Are they answering the question that you ask? That's one thing. And the lagging indicator might be. I'm making this up, so it wouldn't be perfect, but a lagging indicator might be somebody who converts three months from now and is like, "Oh, I've been seeing all your great LinkedIn content." I mean, that's a very perfect scenario.
(09:53):
That doesn't always happen. It rarely happens. We
Rand Fishkin (09:55):
Know it's real, right? Yeah. We know in our brains it's real. It's just hard to measure. We've all done it before. I started reading this blog. I followed this person on Instagram. I subscribed to their YouTube channel. I got their email newsletter and then. And then I signed up for their Patreon and now I'm paying them five bucks a month to support their content efforts. And then I'm buying products that they recommend. We know it's real. It has a long cycle. It can't be proven. It's correlation, not causation. But you're totally right that there's lagging and leading indicators. Whether those things can overcome the, "I need to prove all my digital marketing to myself," is hard to say. But you know what? When it comes to that conversation, I always think, oh, for every person who says, "I can't convince my boss, my team, my client, myself to make that investment." For everyone who says that, I always think, "Ah, that's kind of great because it'll leave more room for the rest of us." Great.
Amanda Natividad (11:04):
That's true.
Rand Fishkin (11:05):
You don't believe in this thing, fine. GTFO.
Amanda Natividad (11:09):
Right, right. Yeah, those are the people who are like, "Well, I know that if I spend more on my SEM ads, that I will get a positive return on my investment." And I'm like, "Cool, you have fun with that. Go spend your 30K for the month on that."
Rand Fishkin (11:28):
Exactly. And they recognize, and we recognize that every platform that's like that, where you can just throw money at it and see essentially a return on ad spend of any kind, that the return on ad spend shrinks every year, and that the margin that you make will shrink, and that it will be more expensive next year than it was this year. And so someone else who's investing in zero-click marketing and not only believes this stuff, but actually internalizes it and makes these correlation-based measurements, they're going to win. They're going to, over time, defeat you because they get better margins, they get a higher return on investment. They can afford to put that money toward profit or toward product improvements or growth, whatever it is.
Amanda Natividad (12:24):
Let's talk about the other side of this. So for people who aren't really bought into the concept of zero-click marketing, I'm curious about, do you have conversations with people where. Not that they're denying the decline in referral traffic, not so much that, right?
Rand Fishkin (12:47):
I see that.
Amanda Natividad (12:47):
Or there is that too.
Rand Fishkin (12:49):
Yeah. Oh yeah.Because in certain industries for certain products or websites or whatever, there is still growth. And so there's so much growth that it outweighs whatever Google is answering and its results or whatever AI is taking away, whatever social's taking away. And so for whatever reason, they think, "Hey, Randall and Amanda are full of it. I can still get traffic. Here's the proof. Look at my up into the right graph in Google Analytics." I mean, great. There are a few people who are still growing their traffic. I'm not telling you to stop trying to grow traffic, but it's very few and far between.
Amanda Natividad (13:36):
Yeah. I think it's more that it's not the game that it used to be. It's not as dependable as it used to be. It's not as predictable as it used to be. And now we're just at the point where you can't really count on that. It might be working today, but the clicks are declining, the referrals are declining. And as we know, the long tail of the web is getting less and less traffic from the top 200 or so websites.
Rand Fishkin (14:07):
So in terms of the conversation to have with people who are not bought into zero click, I think the first thing you have to do is sort of say, "Well, let's assume in this scenario, first off, that for some reason I want to convince them." Because
Amanda Natividad (14:24):
You're like, "I don't care. Do your thing."
Rand Fishkin (14:26):
Exactly. I think that my job and responsibility in the world of marketing, which has been very good to me in my career, is to give back and to say like, "Hey, I am supposed to uncover research and recognize trends and then report on those things in a way that I feel there's very little media that effectively does this first party research directly the way that I'm, I don't know, willing and able to do it. And because I have this giant platform, I think it's my job to use that platform to continue to inform marketers just as marketers helped me early in my career." And so it has an indirect financial benefit. Hopefully people go to AlertMouse and SparkToro and they're like, "Oh yeah, these are cool products that Rand's working on." But a lot of it is not financial at all. It's just sort of do good deeds for a community.
(15:29):
And when I'm trying to convince someone, because I really want to help them or someone in their organization needs my help convincing them, AI has been really helpful. It really has because even people who reject the idea of zero-click marketing are almost always on the AI hype train. And so I can use that, their sort of unairing belief, overwhelming belief in the future is going to be AI, AI's going to be everywhere. It'll take all the jobs.
(16:06):
I can often use that to say, "Well, what's the logical conclusion of an AI that summarizes content and sort of extracts that from all the websites and presents it directly in the interface?" Whether that's ChatGPT or Claude or Google AI mode or whatever they use, that often helps get through that barrier of, "I don't believe in zero click."
Amanda Natividad (16:32):
That's interesting. So then it becomes sort of, okay, fine if you don't believe in that. Well, the future is AI or we are fast moving towards that. So don't you want to benefit from that?
Rand Fishkin (16:50):
Yeah, totally. So for a ton of those people, it's the like, I know that everything in your world is, "Hey, let's ride this AI wave." And that has been quite helpful. Zero click marketing obviously started and the zero click problem started well before the current era of AI post ChatGPT three or whatever. But since its rise, it's been easier to get a lot of these people who previously were holdouts to get on board.
Amanda Natividad (17:23):
It's funny that AI has, it's given us a new mental model to be like, "Hey, here's how you can kind of directionally track the success of your zero click marketing." We can't look at AI rankings or LLM rankings. It isn't that. However, it is that if you are doing the marketing where you are getting mentioned in the right places, if you're starting the conversations you want to be starting, if you are talking about your product in the way that you want it to be talked about and you're getting noticed for it, then you will show up at some point in those answers when people are prompting it with the relevant prompts.
Rand Fishkin (18:07):
I really want to do, but realistically I don't want to do. I want to see someone else do more research to prove that, to basically show time and again, hey, you get mentioned in these places. You will see your visibility in Google AI overviews or ChatGPT's responses rise commensurately. And here's the degree to which that happens. And here are the number of times you would need to be mentioned. Here's how often the models are getting refreshed so that you're in the sort of training data as opposed to just in the retrieval augmented data. I think it's another core problem of our industry is there's just not that many people producing good research on all these topics. And so as a result, a lot of people don't recognize the trends that are happening. And then even when they do, they get misled by snake oil salesmen.
Amanda Natividad (19:09):
Wait, I do want to talk about then, I want to talk about your AI visibility research because that just came out recently. I mean, admittedly, I'm not a super research person, so I don't know the scope or how much people have tried to do this type of research. I know that since you published yours, we've seen a couple of other people replicate some things, like run additional prompts to see if they can replicate some version of AI rankings within ChatGPT or Claude or whatnot. So maybe tell us first how you decided to run this research and then what you hoped to learn from it. I
Rand Fishkin (19:51):
Mostly started it because as I was using AI tools myself, I could see that every time I sent exactly the same prompt, I got different answers back, which made me think, what is the dang point of tracking your rankings or visibility in this thing if it's going to give you random answers based on a statistical lottery of words that frequently come after other words? So then I started seeing, this was last year especially, this huge rise of AI tracking companies, like tons of them. I'm sure your LinkedIn DMs have the same thing mind you, which is like, "Hey, we are an AI tracking tool. Will you promote us for $1,000? Put up a post on LinkedIn or whatever." I have so many of those. I think there must be a hundred companies who sent me an email or a DM. And then everyone, I'm like, "I don't do that.
(20:48):
You have mistaken me for someone who would be willing to do that." And funny that they all believe in influencer marketing, that's pretty great.
(20:57):
Those companies I thought were basically immorally stealing money from marketers and marketers' budgets. I thought it was a scam. The whole AI tracking thing was just, that industry was just a scam industry because these results were so randomized. So then my buddy Patrick O'Donnell, who's one of the co-founders at Gumshoe, I can't remember if he was at Gumshoe or he might've joined it later, but he basically was over for dinner one night because we played Dungeons & Dragons together. And so he's over and he's like, "Well, yes, they're random, but they're random in this way that is measurable. So let's do some research together." And I think I suggested the research. I was like, "Oh yeah, prove it to me." And for those of you who play D&D, he rolled a 20 on his charisma check and convinced me that we should work together on this.
(22:09):
So we essentially recruited a huge panel of participants just from LinkedIn and Threads and Blue Sky. I put up a post and said, "Hey, fill out this form if you're willing to help me test this thing." I want to say I maybe put up three or four posts total and I got 600 volunteers. Wow. Which that tells you a metric ton of people are really interested in this. People really care. I think they're also worried that they're getting scammed, that this industry is baloney. So with those 600 volunteers, we asked them to run the same AI prompts. I think a total of 14 of them over and over and over again. So we got between 70 and a hundred responses to every prompt that we sent. We send different groups, different prompts, whatever. We asked them to do it in ChatGPT. In Claude and in Google, we did not ask them to try and do any depersonalization or any of that junk.
(23:06):
We just wanted to see how wildly different the answers could be in normal environment. If you just asked a random hundred people, what would you get back? Then they copied and pasted all their responses into a Google Form survey. And then we extracted all the brands and products or location. LA Volvo dealerships was one of them. So we extracted the name of every LA Volvo dealership from the answers. We had to do a normalization process. Poor Christie had to dig into the data and make sure that if it was whatever, Brentwood Volvos or Volvos of Brentwood, oh, that's the same one. We need to make sure that's treated that way. And then we did this big analysis where we were like, okay, how many times would you need to ask ChatGPT exactly the same thing to get the same answer in the same order? And the answer is like a thousand.
(24:00):
It's super random, exactly what I thought. Making the rank tracking of AI baloney. Rank tracking, like your position, you're number one in ChatGPT, you're number two in Claude. That's BS. Fully BS. You should not believe it at all. But there were brands that showed up more often than other brands with statistical commonality enough to make us believe, to make me believe, despite my skepticism, that that's real. The percent of times you are visible is a real metric. Some brands were visible close to 100% of the time. Well, maybe 90% of the time. So if you ask what are the best headphones for travel or something, Bose is there almost every time in almost every model. That's pretty good. Sony's there almost every time in almost every model. Where they fall in the rankings and which particular model is mentioned can be different. But it's something.
(25:09):
It does mean something. And that's something you can track over time. So the results of this experiment have been massive citations, tons of people talking about it. And I hope it has also changed a bunch of minds of people who were going to throw way too much money at rank tracking and instead made them go, "Hey, I should question how my AI tracking system is running their prompts, how many times they're running them, whether they're getting statistically significant data, how they're getting those prompts." All those right questions.
Amanda Natividad (25:45):
So I mean with this research we saw that we're seeing that it is worth looking at your visibility. And I mean, it seems like people can replicate this to some extent simply by running their own queries over and over again, right?
Rand Fishkin (26:03):
You totally could. Yeah, absolutely. You know what is crazy about this is these tracking companies, that software can be useful, especially if you don't want to build it yourself. But if you're light on budget and you've got a tiny bit of coding and Claude skills, you could definitely get Claude to write you the code to build one of these quite fast and then just sign up for all the APIs and pay them. That's a plenty fine solution.
Amanda Natividad (26:30):
Oh, that's pretty smart.
Rand Fishkin (26:31):
Yeah. Who knew? You can use AI to track AI.
Amanda Natividad (26:35):
And then you could kind of figure out your own sort of benchmarking for certain industries. If you're looking at the research right now, we know that I'm citing your research, which is average visibility for the top three most mentioned brands were at least 60%. So then maybe you could think about benchmarking for B2B SaaS or whatever your
Rand Fishkin (27:01):
Industry is. Yeah. Any industry, any topic. I think the other interesting finding, the thing that probably surprised me the most was that synthetic prompts, meaning the prompts that AI came up with versus the ones that we asked our human volunteers to come up with.Because we did another experiment where we asked, I think, I want to say 150 plus people gave us their prompt for a B2B and a B2C query or recommendation product recommendation. And when we compared all of the answers to all of those to synthetic prompts, meaning prompts that AI came up with, fake prompts that an AI came up with around the same topic with the same intent, the difference in brand visibility was null. And this is because the AI tools do this query fan out thing. So essentially if you ask for the best headphones, it doesn't matter. You could very wildly vary how you ask.
(28:06):
I'm looking for the top headphones, or I want the five best headphones, or I'm looking for a ranked list of 10 headphones that will function in this way, or I'm buying for a family member. Let me tell you about their backstory. And then ask. All of those will produce similar lists of recommendations. And because of that, I overcame my skepticism that you could use AI to come up with synthetic prompts, like fake prompts that you could then run to check brand visibility around a topic, which is kind of exciting. It's kind of great to know that you can do that because it means you don't necessarily have to pay a clickstream data provider hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars to get real prompts every month. You probably want to do that once or twice, maybe once a year, but it's not as essential as knowing Google search volume, which is super important if you're trying to track SEO.
Amanda Natividad (29:08):
Cool. All right. I feel like we can kind of tie this part with a bow. For zero click marketing, if you are wanting to figure out some kind of indicator for success, you could look at AI visibility. Don't count on the rankings, but you can look at it, you can prompt it, you can build your own sort of AI tools to help you track it. I do kind of like the democratization of that. Yeah, I
Rand Fishkin (29:38):
Do too. It's not
Amanda Natividad (29:39):
That hard to do.
Rand Fishkin (29:40):
And I will say Gumshoe is a good product, right? Yeah.
(29:45):
I put a bunch of screenshots in the research. You can see that even before we did the research, their methodology ended up aligning with how it seems to work. So credit to Patrick, he's a good dude. He's a fun dean AD player and also a good product builder. So you could check them out if you're interested in that. And then apply the same logic. I would tell people, Amanda, I'm sure you would too, apply the same logic to whatever you're tracking. Instagram like, "Hey, look at your comments, look at your view count, look at your impression count, look at your like count, look at your follower growth over time." Then try and correlate that with your sales. If you're trying to track YouTube, you look at your views and watch time and subscriber rate. If you're trying to track Reddit, you see the same thing.
(30:37):
All of these platforms have some metrics that they give you and you can then see, hey, it looks like we're improving, we're lagging, we're falling behind. You don't have to be on every one of these platforms, but there's probably two or three that make a lot of sense for you and your industry.
Amanda Natividad (30:53):
Yeah, probably. And if you need help figuring out how to uncover those reports, you could talk to Claude and work with it to -
Rand Fishkin (31:05):
Yeah, yeah.
Amanda Natividad (31:08):
You're kind of shaking your head, but I'm like -
Rand Fishkin (31:11):
My one fear around this, I think if you already have good numbers, good tracking systems set up, good data, and you feed that into an LLM and you ask it for the correlation, you can get pretty good results right now. But if you're like, "Hey, build me something that tests this," you can get a lot of fake stuff. Oh, right. No,
Amanda Natividad (31:32):
Right. What I was thinking was, and I was playing around with Claude for this, I was basically prompting it to help me pull reports in Google Analytics for SparkToro. And it was telling me like, "Okay, click here, do this, go to this dimension." I was like, "Oh, great." So then I can run that report and then I can see myself like, "Okay, I know what I'm looking at and I know this is the correct report." And then exporting it, giving it to Claude and being like, "Hey, can you tell me what some of the top blog posts are in this timeframe with regards to whatever?" Giving it some parameters and then it'll bring back some recommendations or give some top line thoughts on what's working and what isn't. Now that being said, this also works because I know what I'm looking for and I know what I'm reading.
(32:28):
You know what I mean? I would be, and this might just show my ignorance here, but I would be nervous about doing that for someone else where I don't know their true marketing world and their content world and what they're doing day to day. I'm comfortable doing that for SparkToro because I know what we're doing and I know what's performing well. So if Claude or whatever LLM were to hallucinate something,
Rand Fishkin (32:56):
I would - You'd be able to catch it.
Amanda Natividad (32:57):
Yeah, I would know. I would be like, "Oh, that's not true."
Rand Fishkin (33:00):
But
Amanda Natividad (33:00):
Yeah, it's still useful though.
Rand Fishkin (33:03):
I think this is why AI tools have not affected employment is because maybe they've added some productivity or some opportunity, but I don't see them replacing human beings. You still need people to check, you need people to tell them what to do. You need people to tell them what they're analyzing and then interpret the results and do something with that. You can't just be like, "Hey Claude, why don't you do marketing for me?" And then just walk away. Nope, doesn't work.
Amanda Natividad (33:36):
No. All right. I think we can kind of wrap up here. Were there any myth busting you want to do around zero click
Rand Fishkin (33:45):
Marketing? Zero click marketing does not mean zero sales. In fact, it doesn't even mean sales will decline. Eventually all the things that happen in zero click environment will eventually lead to the same thing that clicks led to, which is someone who wants to buy some shoes will buy some shoes. Will they buy yours? That's determined by the environment of influence, but they're not going to, "Oh yeah, you know what? Google AI mode really solved my problem and I no longer need anything to put on my feet." That's not what's happening. Another big one is that zero click is just Google.
(34:28):
In fact, I would argue that search is one of the places that is least affected, even though it is substantially affected by zero click. It is least affected versus content consumption world where we used to go to blogs and websites and subscribe to their emails and read the blogs every day and go to little forums and read news and all that kind of stuff. And now we're just getting all that summarized by people on TikTok, people on Reddit, people on Hacker News. If you're in there, you're way more likely, everyone is way more likely to go and click on the comments on Reddit than they are to click the website that the post on Reddit links to for the original source. And that's just how people are, right? People want to stay in the platform that they're on now, and the platforms obviously have trained us all to do that.
(35:30):
So if you think Google is the only one, that's a myth.
Amanda Natividad (35:34):
That is well said. All right, friends, thank you for listening or watching Zero Click Marketing. We'll see you next week.