| 4:14 am on Oct 14, 2012 (gmt 0)|
"Time watched" by itself strikes me as a sloppy metric, as a short video would naturally get less time per view. One of the things you learn about editing is to always leave your audience wanting more.
I hope they take that into account and come up with some overall engagement metric. It would be a shame to encourage video makers to pad their content.
| 8:33 am on Oct 14, 2012 (gmt 0)|
Perhaps using 'percentage of video watched' might be better way to do this....
| 4:21 pm on Oct 20, 2012 (gmt 0)|
I thought that's what this new thing is all about. Percentage
Btw, has anyone ever seen/heard of a report of a hacked transcript?
I noticed one video I put up three years ago, and it was hacked...portions of it. I have a screen shot if anyone wants to see it.
| 2:50 pm on Oct 22, 2012 (gmt 0)|
|It means if you keep viewers around on YouTube longer, you're videos will start ranking better. And the view count is discounted at this point. It doesn't mean trying to come out with a ten-minutes-or-longer video just for the sake of coming out with something longer, you actually have to keep those audiences for a long time throughout the video. |
We have about 70 videos in our channel. Recently our subscribers and the monetization on the videos jumped significantly. I'm thinking that this new ranking system is the reason.
These are training videos, so it makes sense that people will watch most of the video once they read the description.
| 10:26 pm on Oct 22, 2012 (gmt 0)|
That's the best video SEO site out there that I've seen. Know of any others?
Any comments on the hacked transcript?
| 10:33 pm on Oct 22, 2012 (gmt 0)|
LostOne, that's the only video seo site I'm familiar with. As far as the hack, have you contacted YouTube? Did they alter links or just text? I've never heard of this happening before.