lol ...Go Bing...?
Sorry if this rambles a bit, but the truth is I don't know where to begin.
1.) People may very well gravitate to paid listings, but tend to buy from the organics. The caveat to this being big brand advertisers.
Most users know that the whole sidebar and top 3 listings are ads (it does say 'ads' after all). It is my understanding that these are, by and large, clicked more out of curiosity than intent to take the site they are delivered to seriously. Back to organic results they go - unless, again, big brands have bought-up the top of the fold.
2.) It has always
been the case that if you're not on page 1 top 3 (organic) that you're getting almost none
of the pie.
3.) The article again cites this "successful searches" based on "CTR" bull^%&t that I've read in about 37,000 other places at this point. WTF is a "successful search"?!?
There is absolutely no way - whatsoever - to define a "successful search" in any meaningful way on Google's side of things: People use the engine in different ways. I'd be willing to wager that 90%+ of webmasters and website owners use Google, and a HUGE chunk of them check their SERPs via the engine, itself, as opposed to using tools like SEO book's stuff, or Link Assistant, etc. etc. That - in and of itself
- can account for every single "[un]successful search".
Honestly, I don't really understand the fuss...what it is - precisely
- that is supposed to be so different now
as concerns organic search: People bought their way to the top pre-Panda and they're doing it now. PageRank buying is worse than ever, etc.
Anywho, I told ya I was gonna ramble.