Why Facebook’s Video Platform Can’t Replace YouTube (Yet)January 30, 2015 2015-01-30 10:13
Why Facebook’s Video Platform Can’t Replace YouTube (Yet)
Why Facebook’s Video Platform Can’t Replace YouTube (Yet)
[Editorial notes: A guest piece by Subrat Kar of Vidooly. Subrat explores the rise of Facebook Videos and whether it can cause a serious dent to Youtube. ]
Well, Facebook seems to have drummed this one, good enough for us, that it’s the (next) big thing when it comes to video marketing as it recently, boasted the fact of holding 60% of the total video shares in the world, and having upgraded the video format of Facebook rivalling it with two specific features akin to YouTube (i.e. a view counter and a “related video function). Speculations are rife over the status of YouTube’s dwindling position in the world of video marketing.
Despite the credible stats of Facebook in terms of wooing the brands and accommodating various video formats as well as an increased watch time of 20 minutes (vs. 15 minutes of YouTube) here are certain pointers that we at Vidooly think, it will take a long time for Facebook to compete with YouTube.
YouTube is the second largest search engine next to Google
YouTube is the second largest search engine in the world next to Google. The amount of video content uploaded on to YouTube has increased from 100 hours per minute to 300 hours per minute in about a year’s time. Though mobile video consumption on both Facebook & YouTube forum contributes major share, but still the technology developed by YouTube recently such as offline streaming on mobile device is amazing.
YouTube has been a primary player when it comes to video as it exclusively, is a video hosting platform (though originally it was launched for video dating). Giving exposure to newer talents or moments of delights as often as in the case of YouTube in the form of home videos is how it got its recognition. While for Facebook it’s just adding another feather to its long list of credentials (read services in social network). It’s interesting to note that every video shared under the umbrella of facebook’s native uploads does not necessarily mean ‘seen’ but ‘shared’ and garners generic likes and comments as visible interaction which works heavily for brands, however with YouTube, the algorithm works very much to deliver the ‘seen’ quotient as directly proportional to the popularity of a relative video (how do you suppose
It’s interesting to note that every video shared under the umbrella of facebook’s native uploads does not necessarily mean ‘seen’ but ‘shared’ and garners generic likes and comments as visible interaction which works heavily for brands, however with YouTube, the algorithm works very much to deliver the ‘seen’ quotient as directly proportional to the popularity of a relative video (how do you suppose Gangam style went viral). Facebook can be seen as the ‘jack of all trades’ with the video upgrade, to only smoothen its journey in social media.
Clients and formats:
YouTube gives a platform to individual talents and plethora of other digital formats for digital consumption in various genres much more than Facebook could ever offer (from digital diaries, how –to –videos, digital series, rising pop stars, singing sensation etc.) which is a feat quite impossible to match by facebook’s native uploads. One can still encounter glitches while recording videos native to
One can still encounter glitches while recording videos native to facebook. Moreover, the auto-play option embedded in the video is not to everyone’s pleasure. Even the premium Video ads which start playing on mute even when one scrolls past, is an activity which investors have to still shell money for. (Even though the end objective is not achieved, in case of such mute ads.) One can still remember the very first ad launched by Facebook announcing its video upgrade celebrating home-videos. Ironically, it’s not the home videos but brands making moolah in the form of product promotion videos.
You can share YT video on any other social media platforms, but not in case of FB video
The YouTube video/s are easy to share on other social networks such as Facebook, Twitter, G+, Pinterest etc. This will help you to get more discoverability & increase watch time. However one can’t directly share videos from facebook to YouTube & other social networking platforms, hence causing loss of audience & discoverability.
YouTube shares revenue among creators, but FB takes 100% revenue to home?
It’s interesting to note that under the banner of YouTube Partner Program the individual creators earns 55% of the revenue generated with 45% going to YouTube while in the case of facebook if one fine day, you decide to share your ‘creation’/talent on facebook , it’s still facebook making 100% of the revenue under the new change of policies starting 2015. There is no such monetization opportunity available with Facebook video platform right now.
Only pay when someone watches your ad on YouTube
With the YouTube’s TrueView in-stream ads, you pay only, when someone watches your content ie when the content surpasses minimum threshold time, but in case of Facebook videos you will be charged even when someone scrolls your ad. There are various ad formats too, available on YouTube ( including Google display ), but in case of Facebook a lot of factors need to be optimised to get desired ROI (rate of interest) from the video advertisement.
YouTube’s search & discovery is better than Facebook
On an average 20-30% of YouTube’s video views come from YT & Google search that helps content creators to maximize their organic views. However , a native upload on facebook does not earn you desirable search results & hence there is no chances to maximize views organically. Also, with better meta data optimization facility available on YouTube; allows users to improve the search rank of their video. Currently there is no such features available on Facebook for meta data optimization.
Facebook does not have a content ID technology for video owners
For those who don’t know Content ID, it is a copyright technology system where content owners can use it to identify and manage their contents on YouTube. Every single videos uploaded to YouTube are scanned against a database of files that have been submitted to YouTube by content owners. Copyright owners get to decide what happens when content in a video on YouTube matches a work they own. When this happens, the video gets a content ID claim. Well it seems a great innovation undertaken by YouTube. Currently there is no such technology available with facebook and even if facebook wants to build similar technology for its content creators, I think it will take atleast 3-5 years down the line to ready the product.
Conclusively, it’s just our prediction & analysis at Vidooly that Facebook can’t take off to YouTube video platform in 2015. It may take off, but it might as well take a long time for facebook to get ready with vast infrastructure and by then YouTube too, could have grown multi folds. Let’s see for this is only something the time can tell. ?
[About the author: Subrat is the Co-founder & CEO of Vidooly, a YouTube marketing & analytics suite for content creators, brands & multi-channel networks that help them to grow on YouTube. You can reach him out on Subrat@vidooly.com or follow on twitter @subratkar.]