Note: I like her format, what I call a query piece, which is rarely used (well) but is a context twist that can engage readers. I do think the title deserves a question mark though, which is why I added it in the anchor text.
While entity association has long stood on it's own SEs, especially Google, have been ramping it up as part of their social-personal results integration.
This illustrates what I mean: those sites connected the brand entity with the diet entity and Google made note.
Out of curiosity, I did a quick search for ‘jack in the box vegan’ and lo and behold, there are websites out there telling you how to eat vegan items at this chain.
And yes, you probably are quite correct that that town is not a resounding vegan haven.
Two points leading one to the other:
When Google has a paucity of information for a specific category of businesses in a specific town, should they just throw other things into the SERPs, even if they aren’t well related? For example, in a town with 2 dentists, should the 3rd result be a chiropractor, just to fill up an extra spot?
1. when a SE has a paucity of information (initial results for query) they may expand their parameters by some formula to some new boundary and try again. This is pretty well standard.
2. it is unlikely that (but not impossible) that your example result would return. However, what is likely is (1) expanding geo-parameter boundary to include dentists from outside that town, i.e. from surrounding town(s), (2) expanding the occupation-parameter boundary to include dental hygienist, orthodontists, denturists, etc., or (3) both.
Note: in '2' above I have mixed more than a SE might for the purposes of illustration. Nary a chiropractor nor proctologist in sight however.
A general afterthought:
Edited by iamlost, 07 February 2012 - 12:59 AM.