Welcome to the Q&A Forum
Browse the forum for helpful insights and fresh discussions about all things SEO.
This is the link you're looking for http://youtubecreator.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/using-google-page-identity-on-youtube.html
It's a bit convoluted, but it does work. First step is getting the YouTube account added as a "Manager" of the Company G+ account
I'm biased because I created the strategy...
But I think we do pretty decent stuff with video at Distilled. We offer training, consulting and conferences as our products.
Our YouTube channel - http://youtube.com/distilledseo is filled with loads of informational content designed to increase our brand awareness. This content also lives on our blog
We have video all around our website designed to improve conversions and sell our identity as a business e.g. https://www.distilled.net/contact/ https://www.distilled.net/about/people/benjamin-estes/
Then we have an entire library of premium video content which you have to pay to access http://www.distilled.net/store/landing/ . This stuff is way deeper in the conversion funnel, but helps to get us bigger customers and high value contracts.
re="canonical" - or noindex the video section, dependent on how similar the pages are. If they're different enough, a "noindex,follow" tag will be more appropriate.
Do you mean the link in the description? Or the overlays if you're partner?
I don't see any reason why you can't put a 301 on either, but why not just link to the actual site itself?
Essentially - no..... (unless you want to pay someone to do it for you)
but if you managed to set everything up according to Wistia's SEO guidelines, you should be fine.
I'd normally estimate it'll take 1-2 months for the snippet to show for a medium sized site with reasonable domain authority. For smaller sites, it can take longer and it can appear within a matter of weeks or days for stronger sites.
In short - no.
Videos can appear for any in the SERPs - and it will vary dependent on the keyword in question. If you're struggling to get about 5, I suggest you probably just need to build more/better links to see substantial increases.
Hi Ron,
I think there may be some value in building your YouTube presence for certain keywords, but you're looking at this situation all the wrong way round.
Really - you should start by looking at your business goals and determining whether, for a specific keyword, you want users to go to your site, or to YouTube to watch a video. If the keyword is informational and potentially appeals to individuals high up in your conversion funnel - that is to say, they aren't already engaged influencers or members of your community - then getting them to watch a video on YouTube that helps solve a specific problem or provides decent (non sales-focused) information might be the way to go.
If you're then able to create good content to fit with the user intent for that keyword - THEN you can think about optimising your YouTube videos and presence with specific keyword intent.
Don't start with the form (video) or the channel (youtube) but instead start with the audience and the business goals - then work out your strategy from there.
in terms of optimising for YouTube - basically, the Title should be treated like a title, the description like a meta description - then you need to drive targeted engagement (not just raw views) in order to get the video ranking. Embeds and links also help, and uploading a transcription manually will allow you to rank for longer tail phrases which match the text in the transcription itself.
I hope that's useful.
It used to be the case that iframe embeds often wouldn't get videos indexed, but provident you submit a sitemap correctly, it's now possible to do so (though not as surefire as flash or html5 embeds).
So, If you're dead set on using Vimeo (It's not the best option out there if you're trying to get videos ranking), then I'd recommend starting with an iframe embed, submitting your sitemap, then potentially using the flash "old" embed option if you fail to get the video indexed within a few months.
More details on how to do that here: http://www.distilled.net/blog/video/creating-video-sitemaps-for-each-video-hosting-platform/
I think that'll be a significant part too - though I think there's probably a few other things purely on the YouTube side that are helping.
It's clever from a manipulative perspective - so I think the admiration is for the results, not the method.
I personally don't think it's a great strategy and I don't imagine it'll have longevity, or that it'll have good conversion rate, because the video is really truly terrible.
So... yes, this is basically just a classic YouTube spam attack at reasonable scale. Nothing terribly sophisticated as far as I can ascertain (though I'm not going to out the tactics I see used publicly here).
It's fairly common knowledge that the YouTube algorithm is much easier to spam than the Google algorithm (in some ways, it's like Google from 5 years ago) and sadly, this seems to cross over a bit into Google organic so that you can effectively get YouTube videos rankings for very competitive terms by virtue of the fact that Google often ranks YouTube pages/videos very highly, yet YouTube is seemingly not subject to quite the same spam detection or treatment as other websites.
I don't imagine this ranking will last (it'll get flagged eventually) and I'm not terribly impressed with the work done to achieve this, though obviously the results are pretty impressive if you're into grey hat/black hat stuff.
Hey Chris,
I agree that your current implementation, while not ideal, is perfectly adequate for the purposes of ensuring you don't have duplicate content or cannibalisation problems - but still allows Google to index the UCG images.
You're also preventing Googlebot from seeing the user profile pages, which is a good idea, since many of them are very thin and mostly duplicate.
So, from a pure SEO perspective, I think you've done a good job.
However... I think you should also consider the ethical implications of potentially blocking the image googlebot as well. By preventing Google from indexing all those images of young girls fawning over the vacuous runners up of a televised talent show, you would undoubtedly be doing the world a great service.
You can implement schema was almost any kind of video embed, including an embedded YouTube video.
However, if your focus is on trying to get rich snippets in the search results, you'll be best of not using YouTube (more details here: http://moz.com/blog/building-a-video-seo-strategy)
Hey Dan,
In short - no, I don't think is going to be a problem for you. YouTube are aware that their auto-generated transcripts are often inaccurate, so I don't imagine you're going to find that profanity coming up there has any effect on the categorization of the video. That said, It's really easy to fix by just uploading your own version of the transcript, which will take precedence over the autogenerated one. ThompsonPaul has given a great explanation of a quick and easy way to do that also on this thread.
In terms of a channel trailer, once you log into your YouTube account, under the "Home" button, there should be a massive icon called "Channel Trailer" with a blue button, which will allow you to upload a trailer or choose one from your library.
I think that's a good summation Mat.
It's not going to add any "SEO" value at all, but it might be useful for users. If so, great; If not, don't do it.
Hi Stu,
Apologies - I assumed this was author and didn't check for the publisher mark-up.
I appreciate this is a bit of a hot topic and truly nobody has a great answer right now - but I don't think rel="publisher" should be used for anything that isn't in some sense journalistic. Category pages, product pages, home pages etc aren't really authored by an organisation - but, for example, "the beginners guide to SEO" on Moz absolutely is and should have the rel="publisher" mark-up attributed. Essentially - I'd define it as "collaborative content" where there's more than one author.
However, I'll back track on my previous point - I don't think your implementation here will be causing you issues, though all the video points remain.
Cheers,
Phil
First thing to say is that this might be really tricky. I've previous come across several instances of Google basically not removing video snippets - even when videos are removed from the page and the content is completely refreshed.. it seems like, right now, once you've got a video indexed, it's hard to get that removed.
The other thing to suggest is that your authorship mark-up is pretty spammy and not appropriate. "Liberty Games" are not an author and shouldn't be getting that snippet - so I can imagine image recognition seeing that your thumbnail isn't a human face and therefore choosing to ignore this implementation and provide the video instead consistently.
In terms of removing the video result - you basically want to refresh and resubmit everything so Google recrawls and reindexes. Resubmit your Video sitemap, make some adjustments on the page (including removing the video) then resubmit that via GWMT. No guarantees though unfortunately, as I mentioned - this can be a tough one!
