Last week I saw a pretty random press release on YouTube surpassing Google as the world’s #2 ranked site as measured by Alexa. Odd, I thought. I did not even read it, but for whatever reason, it stuck with me. It was odd because some time ago YouTube surpassed MySpace, and I commented that this is why MySpace blocked Photobucket: they learned their lesson. MySpace was right in saying that YouTube had built some of their momentum on MySpace. But, we like and respect both companies so we don’t want to take sides. Disclosure: both are valuable distribution partners of WatchMojo.com’s video content.
Today I read that CNET is adding (via SAI) closed captioning to its videos:
CNET’s re-launched service includes a number of new features–chief among them a new closed-captioning option. Through partnerships with Automatic Sync Technologies and Adobe Systems, the captioning system is an attempt by CNET to reach an estimated 30 million deaf and hard-of-hearing U.S. consumers.
I am a big fan of adding text selectively to video.
I think adding closed captioning is a very valuable thing to do for users, we add text to our travel videos because often times they are see in a mute setting.
In fact, I am currently looking for a transcription service to spider our thousands of videos so that the accompanying text of our videos are available for users (If you got one, call me, or better yet, email me at ash@mojosupreme.com).
Are we thinking solely about end-users? Yes, but not solely. Anyone that says that they are is lying. CNET is candid about its intentions (and we praise them for it):
Not only that, but the captioning makes it far easier for CNET to monetize its video content, Gillespie said.
“It turns into SEO honey,” Gillespie said of the meta data, which greatly improves the search engine optimization process.
Randall Rothenberg, president and CEO of the Interactive Advertising Bureau, described CNET’s revamped service as “emblematic of the next phase of online video,” and expects other top publishers to follow CNET’s lead.
We’re all trying to add text for marketing and sales purposes. I’ll skip the sales one for a second and say that from a marketing standpoint, when you read that search engines are looking for ways to read images and recognize things, people and places in video, then it’s smart to adopt a SEO philosophy to video content.
But while I agree and give props to CNET, I think that it’s important for media companies and marketers to realize that trying to win yesterday’s wars is foolish, you need to look ahead and realize that there is a mirror, parallel universe being created in the broadband world.
It sounds odd to talk about parallel universes when everything is supposedly a click away. Indeed, search engines will be able to recognize video beyond just metadata, but thinking about Google alone is foolish.
It’s akin to how media companies usually think: they plan 6 months analyzing an opportunity, take 3 months to move on something and an additional 3 months to study the results and impacts thereof. By that time, things have moved. This is similar to the video revolution: by the time you plan on addressing Google, you forget that the needle has moved.
In fact, YouTube, MySpace TV, Veoh, Revver, et al. are creating their own ecosystem with their own dynamics.
Connecting the dots, while Google probably remains a larger property than YouTube - despite what the press release and Alexa might say - you need to recognize that what Google and YouTube track are different things.
CNET, WatchMojo.com et al. need to leverage existing universes such as Google and the major portals that drive traffic… but content owners are better off asking themselves what they are doing to plan and prepare for the next Google instead of worrying too much time about catching up to the Google we know.
Ideally, you do both, of course.
For a rundown of all of the aspirants to become the Google of tomorrow click here and here.
Subscribe: