Using video transcripts v captions and avoiding duplicate content?

[vernonmack]

Part 1: After editing a You Tube transcript, I typically re-upload as a caption file (with time codes)...for SEO does it matter whether you upload as a transcript v. captions?  Is one better than the other?

Part 2:  If you upload a transcript (or caption) to YouTube, then post that video/transcript in your blog, wouldn't you get pinged for duplicate content?

[PhilNottingham]

Hi Jennifer,

In short - the answer to both your questions is No. What you're doing is absolutely fine

With YouTube Closed captions - you can upload multiple files - covering multiple languages/descriptive transcripts/speech transcripts. All sorts if you really want to. There is no difference from an SEO perspective between the "captions" model with timecodes or simply the text "transcript". Both are ultimately read like copy text for the video.

The YouTube video embed on an external site is read as an independent media element with the uploaded transcript file as meta-data applied to that media. Even if the on-page copy contains the identical text, it appears as a different form to the engines and is valuable to users as well - there is no "duplicate content" risk, as the content is presented in totally different formats.

I would continue with what you're currently doing - which sounds good :).

Phil

[vernonmack]

Sigh of relief.  Thanks, Phil!