What the web already says.
A data source for your studies. Existing posts, reviews, forum threads, and articles from the open web, gathered against your study's purpose and structured into the same evidence model as your conversations.
Observed evidence. Language people already wrote, collected and read against your question.
Driven by the purpose. There is nothing to configure. The purpose you state determines which pages get gathered and the lens each one is read through.
The rest of the study. Web evidence sits beside the conversations your campaigns start, under one purpose and one evidence model.
Scoped to your purpose, not just your brand name.
You state the purpose and the source runs from there, finding relevant pages across review sites, forums, communities, and coverage, and the intelligence core reads each one whole through the lens of that purpose, extracting the same full signal set as every other source, with every page kept as a citable source.
- Review sites. What buyers say after the purchase.
- Forums and communities. Owner threads, comparison debates, the unprompted complaint.
- Articles and coverage. The narrative your audience is reading.
Web evidence can't answer back.
A page cannot be asked a follow-up. You get what people chose to write, never the answer to the question you actually have. That is not a flaw to hide. It is the reason studies exist.
When the web hasn't said it, ask.
The same study can run conversational ads or AI surveys next to the web evidence. Observed language for breadth, solicited answers for depth, one evidence model underneath.
Bring the question. We'll bring both kinds of evidence.
What the web says, and what people say when you ask.
Talk to us