[byrneseyeview]

They are about "original content" in the Google sense. It's not quality content, just well-SEO'd stuff that is 1) good enough for Google to think it's grammatically-correct English, but 2) bad enough that contextual ads on the article will still get clicks.

[patio11]

Guys, draw a big circle around point #2 here and remember it: Demand Media understands the user psychology of CPC ads better than any Valley startup you've ever heard of. They want their content to suck because if it satisfies the users' needs then the users will not click the ads. If, on the other hand, it introduces the topic and leaves the user feeling "Where do I go next?", then the only options from a Demand Media page are either a) other worthless articles or b) CPC ads. And people choose door #2 quite frequently.

This kind of frustrates me to the extent that I compete with Demand Media (limited, but real), because there is absolutely no circumstance under which a Demand Media article is a better result for the user than a page on my site if we're in competition, but Demand Media has the economics of it nailed such that they can produce content for some genres at scales I can't possibly keep up without duplicating their core strategy (automated keyword selection -> cheap freelancer -> post without substantial quality control), pushing my related content out of the SERPs and then charging me for the clicks I would otherwise be getting for free.

[byrneseyeview]

I got Point #2 from your blog, by the way. So thanks!

[enjo]

Do you rank better for pages you do compete on head-to-head?