Moz Q&A is closed.
After more than 13 years, and tens of thousands of questions, Moz Q&A closed on 12th December 2024. Whilst we’re not completely removing the content - many posts will still be possible to view - we have locked both new posts and new replies. More details here.
Allow Embedding on a YouTube but Only for Specific Sites
-
Hello,
This is more of a technical question but does anyone know if it’s possible to allow embedding on YouTube videos only for specific sites? We want to restrict embedding on our videos but still be able to embed them on our domain.
I’m already listed as the primary owner and have the channel linked to my personal email (same email used to upload videos) but when I go to the below link mentioned on Google's Page for Restrict Embedding (https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6301625) it says I don’t have permission to access that page for both my personal account and channel. The documentation states it's possible to "Block embedding on all sites or apps except for those URLs or app package names you enter in the text box." but I can't seem to find it. I can only find the option to turn it off/on completely.
https://www.youtube.com/content_owner_settings
I noticed my personal email hasn't been verified; would that make a difference here?
Any help or insight on how to approach this would be very much appreciated.
Looking forward to hearing from all of you!
Thank you in advance.
Best, -
Enabling YouTube embedding for specific websites is a wise decision. It gives content creators control over where their videos are shared, ensuring that they are consistent with their brand or message. This restriction strikes a compromise between exposure and content integrity, protecting against misuse while encouraging a more personalized online presence.I usually recommend YouTube Vanced since it is really good and is free, as well as more secure.
@Ben-R said in Allow Embedding on a YouTube but Only for Specific Sites:
Hello,
This is more of a technical question but does anyone know if it’s possible to allow embedding on YouTube videos only for specific sites? We want to restrict embedding on our videos but still be able to embed them on our domain.
I’m already listed as the primary owner and have the channel linked to my personal email (same email used to upload videos) but when I go to the below link mentioned on Google's Page for Restrict Embedding (https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/6301625) it says I don’t have permission to access that page for both my personal account and channel. The documentation states it's possible to "Block embedding on all sites or apps except for those URLs or app package names you enter in the text box." but I can't seem to find it. I can only find the option to turn it off/on completely.
https://www.youtube.com/content_owner_settings
I noticed my personal email hasn't been verified; would that make a difference here?
Any help or insight on how to approach this would be very much appreciated.
Looking forward to hearing from all of you!
Thank you in advance.
Best, -
Enabling embedding on YouTube while restricting it to specific websites is a smart move in the digital age. Embedding videos not only allows creators to expand their reach but also enhances user engagement and the overall online experience. However, it's equally crucial to maintain control over where your content is shared.
This feature strikes a balance between openness and control. By permitting embedding exclusively on chosen websites, content creators can ensure their videos are showcased on platforms that align with their values or complement their content. This can help prevent misuse or misrepresentation of their work on websites that may not adhere to the same standards.
Furthermore, this approach fosters collaboration between creators and website owners, encouraging partnerships and cross-promotion that can benefit both parties. It promotes responsible sharing and allows for a more personalized online presence.
In essence, allowing selective embedding on YouTube empowers content creators to curate their digital footprint, fostering a more controlled and purpose-driven online environment.
-
The content owner is something separate, where you register the content as unique and original. Theoretically, that way you would have the "right" to determine where the content can get posted/shared or not, and you will have the right to remove the video if other people share it, and even let it there and get the ad revenue that is generated from the said video.
You can learn more about content ID here.
Daniel Rika - Dalerio Consulting
https://dalerioconsulting.com/
[email protected] -
Thank you very much for your help. When I check permissions I’m already listed as the primary owner. Would that be the same as being “accepted in Content ID as a Content Owner” or is that something separate?
Thanks again!
Best, -
In order to configure embed blocking and whitelisting your website, it is required for your account to be accepted in Content ID as a Content Owner.
After being accepted as a Content Owner, you will have the option to "Allow on certain domains (in apps based on ID)" where you will be able to whitelist certain sites or apps for embedding your videos. You can read more about it here.
If you are not registered as a content owner, then there is currently no way to whitelist sites from embedding your video.
Daniel Rika - Dalerio Consulting
https://dalerioconsulting.com/
[email protected]
Got a burning SEO question?
Subscribe to Moz Pro to gain full access to Q&A, answer questions, and ask your own.
Browse Questions
Explore more categories
-
Moz Tools
Chat with the community about the Moz tools.
-
SEO Tactics
Discuss the SEO process with fellow marketers
-
Community
Discuss industry events, jobs, and news!
-
Digital Marketing
Chat about tactics outside of SEO
-
Research & Trends
Dive into research and trends in the search industry.
-
Support
Connect on product support and feature requests.
Related Questions
-
Using the same image across the site?
Hi just wondering i'm using the same image across 20 pages which are optimized for SEO purposes. I was wondering is there issues with this from SEO standpoint? Will Google devalue the page because the same image is being used? Cheers.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | seowork2140 -
Embedding Video for SEO? YouTube, Vimeo, or Wistia?
I believe Vimeo has the advantages of being able to embed your video on your website without advertising and the ability to brand the player with your company name. Can't do that with YouTube. However obviously Google give a bit more weight to YouTube videos in search results. But I'm talking about ranking the website, not the video. If the objective is to provide the biggest boost to the website's ranking (not the individual video), is it best to embed the YouTube video or can you post the video on both YouTube, Vimeo, and Wistia and embed the Vimeo or Wistia video? My gut feeling is that Google would see the direct linkage between the video on YouTube and the website it's embedded on and potentially that would have (albeit probably small) more benefit in the website's ranking than embedding the Vimeo or Wistia video? HOWEVER, re the SEO claims on this Wistia page true? Would the best strategy be to use Wistia for embedding and then also post the videos on a YouTube channel for maximum exposure? From Wistia: _Vimeo, like YouTube, is a powerful domain for SEO, but when you host your videos on these platforms, you are not doing your website's SEO a favor. When you upload your video to Vimeo or YouTube, the search engines are indexing the original url, not your website's. In contrast, when you embed a Wistia video on your website, your website gains all of the SEO benefits. Vimeo videos are ranked to drive traffic to Vimeo to keep users on their platform. Wistia videos drive traffic to your website—not ours._
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Jazee1 -
Splitting One Site Into Two Sites Best Practices Needed
Okay, working with a large site that, for business reasons beyond organic search, wants to split an existing site in two. So, the old domain name stays and a new one is born with some of the content from the old site, along with some new content of its own. The general idea, for more than just search reasons, is that it makes both the old site and new sites more purely about their respective subject matter. The existing content on the old site that is becoming part of the new site will be 301'd to the new site's domain. So, the old site will have a lot of 301s and links to the new site. No links coming back from the new site to the old site anticipated at this time. Would like any and all insights into any potential pitfalls and best practices for this to come off as well as it can under the circumstances. For instance, should all those links from the old site to the new site be nofollowed, kind of like a non-editorial link to an affiliate or advertiser? Is there weirdness for Google in 301ing to a new domain from some, but not all, content of the old site. Would you individually submit requests to remove from index for the hundreds and hundreds of old site pages moving to the new site or just figure that the 301 will eventually take care of that? Is there substantial organic search risk of any kind to the old site, beyond the obvious of just not having those pages to produce any more? Anything else? Any ideas about how long the new site can expect to wander the wilderness of no organic search traffic? The old site has a 45 domain authority. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | 945010 -
Merging Niche Site
I posted a question about this a while ago, but still haven't pulled the trigger. I have a main site (bobsclothing.com). I also have a EM niche site (i.e shirtsmall.com). It would be more efficient for me to merge these site, because: I would have to manage content, promos, etc. on a single site. In other words, I can focus efforts on 1 site. If I am writing content, I don't have to split the work. I don't have to worry about duplicate content. Right now, if I enter a product URL into copyscape, the other sites is returned for many products. What makes me apprehensive are: The niche site actually ranks for more keywords than the main site, although it has lower revenue. Slightly lower PA, and DA. Niche site ranks top 20 for a profitable keyword that has about 1300 exact match searches. If you include the longer tail versions of the keyword it would be more. If I merge these sites, and do proper 301s (product to product, category to category) how likely is it that main site will still rank for that keyword? Am I likely to end up with a site that has stronger DA? Am I better off keeping the niche site and just focusing content efforts on the few keywords that it can rank well for? I appreciate any advice. If someone has done this, please share your experience. TIA
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | inhouseseo0 -
Should I redirect images when I migrate my site
We are about to migrate a large website with a fair few images (20,000). At the moment we include images in the sitemap.xml so they are indexed by Google and drive traffic (not sure how I can find out how much though). Current image slugs are like:
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | ArchMedia
http://website.com/assets/images/a2/65680/thumbnails/638x425-crop.jpg?1402460458 Like on the old site, images on the new website will also have unreadable cache slugs, like:
http://website.com/site_media/media/cache/ce/7a/ce7aeffb1e5bdfc8d4288885c52de8e3.jpg All content pages on the new site will have the same slugs as on the old site. Should I go through the trouble of redirecting all these images?0 -
How much impact do Youtube transcripts have?
We're considering transcribing our videos. It's a significant enough expense that we have to be sure of the impact. 1. How much effect do the transcripts have on Youtube SEO rankings? 2. Should we also post the transcripts beneath the video, or is uploading them sufficient? If we didn't post the transcripts, we'd just write custom keyword rich text for each video. We could post both keyword text and transcript text, but that may be too wordy. Does anyone have experience on how much Youtube transcripts impact rankings? Thanks
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | lighttable0 -
Splitting a Site into Two Sites for SEO Purposes
I have a client that owns a business that really could be easily divided into two separate business in terms of SEO. Right now his web site covers both divisions of his business. He gets about 5500 visitors a month. The majority go to one part of his business and around 600 each month go to the other. So about 11% I'm considering breaking off this 11% and putting it on an entirely different domain name. I think I could rank better for this 11%. The site would only be SEO'd for this particular division of the company. The keywords would not be in competition with each other. I would of course link the two web sites and watch that I don't run into any duplicate content issues. I worry about placing the redirects from the pages that I remove to the new pages. I know Google is not a fan of redirects. Then I also worry about the eventual drop in traffic to the main site now. How big of a factor is traffic in rankings? Other challenges include that the business services 4 major metropolitan areas. Would you do this? Have you done this? How did it work? Any suggestions?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | MSWD0 -
URL Structure for Directory Site
We have a directory that we're building and we're not sure if we should try to make each page an extension of the root domain or utilize sub-directories as users narrow down their selection. What is the best practice here for maximizing your SERP authority? Choice #1 - Hyphenated Architecture (no sub-folders): State Page /state/ City Page /city-state/ Business Page /business-city-state/
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | knowyourbank
4) Location Page /locationname-city-state/ or.... Choice #2 - Using sub-folders on drill down: State Page /state/ City Page /state/city Business Page /state/city/business/
4) Location Page /locationname-city-state/ Again, just to clarify, I need help in determining what the best methodology is for achieving the greatest SEO benefits. Just by looking it would seem that choice #1 would work better because the URL's are very clear and SEF. But, at the same time it may be less intuitive for search. I'm not sure. What do you think?0