Commentary

Why Online Businesses Should Avoid Hosting Their Videos On YouTube

YouTube is a good way to get started with online video to promote your business, products and services. It's free, easy to use and almost everyone knows how to play the videos.

However, you can compromise your content by only using free online host sites like YouTube. Many businesses are damaging their online reputation by publishing video of poor quality on their websites: the video often stutters or stops, the image is embedded with logos from the hosting site, surrounded by advertising (often from competitors!), and the video is often confined to a limited file size, player dimensions and duration. If you want the ability to track who sees your video and control what they do with it, consider migrating to an online video platform. You don't absolutely need one; your business can host its own videos if the web support team has the bandwidth and technical capability. Also, if your videos get successful, you may find yourself paying high hosting fees or having to migrate to a CDN to deliver your videos.

"Our business has a specific audience, starved for exclusive content," said one vice president of a cigar and wine company. "We decided to build and launch a video-based subscription media site aimed at that demographic. YouTube does not offer that capability." For a CEO of a sports equipment company, another benefit of an online video platform is that "The SEO [search engine marketing] is in our control and we can brand our own videos." When you use a public domain site like YouTube, your videos can be reproduced or prepared for derivative works. Here is an excerpt from the YouTube Terms and Conditions: "The Service may include hyperlinks to other web sites that are not owned or controlled by YouTube. YouTube has no control over, and assumes no responsibility for, the content, privacy policies, or practices of any third party websites." Businesses who rely on YouTube are giving away exclusive rights to their content, exposing themselves to abuse of their material as well as missing out on a professional looking video player for their website.

11 comments about "Why Online Businesses Should Avoid Hosting Their Videos On YouTube ".
Check to receive email when comments are posted.
  1. Mark Burrell from Tongal, June 9, 2011 at 5:31 p.m.

    No offense but instead of writing the article why not just say "use our services"

  2. Jimm Fox from One Market Media, June 9, 2011 at 5:47 p.m.

    Salesforce.com hosts all of their video (1,000's of videos) on YouTube. Salesforce is a really smart company - are they wrong to be hosting on YouTube?

    I think it might be reasonable for a reader to question your objectivity, given your position.

  3. Jeff Skaggs from CraveOnline, June 9, 2011 at 6:02 p.m.

    Isn't that sort of like telling Oliver Stone (your main investor) that he should only show his movies in Landmark Theaters?

    I wonder if he would agree.

  4. Bob Kiger from Videography Lab, June 9, 2011 at 6:17 p.m.

    I'm into using Youtube as promotion feed for best-music-video-movie channel. Those interested in knowing more find my Profile on Facebook. We are gathering many great movies. We have a format for gathering data on the movies that is Smart-Quick. Help US find the best-music-video-movies.

  5. Jim Lillicotch from Lillicotch.com, June 9, 2011 at 8:04 p.m.

    Spoken like someone that's never used YouTube. Very little of your criticism is true.

  6. Gregory Ng, June 9, 2011 at 10:55 p.m.

    I could not disagree with this article more. It is true that if you plan on charging for exclusive web video content you will need a service outside of YouTube (or self-host). But to say "you can compromise your content by only using free online host sites like YouTube" and then cite SEO as a reason you need to maintain control is ludicrous. Proper tagging videos on YouTube is THE best thing for SEO of your video content. That is not even up for debate.

  7. Mark Laudi from Hong Bao Media (Holdings) Pte Ltd, June 10, 2011 at 6:04 a.m.

    My company produces programs for clients, and in our experience:
    1. YouTube is NOT the best system to host programs on. Lack of in-depth measurability, absence of a range of diverse and customisable layouts and the absence of interactivity options are just three reasons. The issue with adverts which Stephen talked about is another.
    2. Clients think putting their videos on YouTube will get them views - and we all know that this counts for a very small number of videos.
    3. When a client puts a video on their website with the YouTube watermark on it, that immediately tells the viewer: we haven't thought this through properly, and we're too cheap to host it on a proper player.
    4. Go to www.vidcompare.com and see the dozens and dozens of providers of online streaming services. They exist, because they offer value which YouTube doesn't.

  8. Jimm Fox from One Market Media, June 10, 2011 at 11:41 a.m.

    @Mark - So what you are saying is that Salesforce.com hasn't thought through their video distribution strategy. Wow, you must really know your stuff!

    And to be clear... no one (except you) has characterized the issue as YouTube being 'The best video hosting strategy'. YouTube is simply one of many options. Even Brightcove, the market leader, recommends you post your videos on YouTube (and use their service as well)

    It's understandable that Stephen would have issues with YouTube - it's rather difficult to compete with the Google cash machine.

    ... and finally ( I could go on...) I love that you mention 'the lack of interactivity'. That's one of the things YouTube offers for free that many / most other services do not offer.

    Sure, YouTube isn't for everyone - but it's a hell of a service considering there is no cost. For small businesses with low budgets and limited requirements it's a great service.

  9. Jonathan Mirow from BroadbandVideo, Inc., June 10, 2011 at 1:39 p.m.

    I'm kind of suprized that the guys at MediaPost even let this one-sided, mis-informed "sales effort" even see the light of day. Hey, when I write this stuff they're smart enough to throw it away. Stephen is the CEO of a video hosting platform - what's he gonna say "Don't use my company, use a free service instead?" Here's the real deal - three years ago I would've written the same article - I have a fully functional, interactive, highly sophisticated video delivery system sitting on servers I OWN - and you know where I put my clients' video? YouTube. Stuttering and streaming problems? What are you talking about? I get killer HD ALL THE TIME with no compatability issues. Links and associated content? What are you talking about - have you ever actually USED YouTube? My embedded videos have no links, no ads and show a button that says "Replay?" The only thing that identifies these embeds as YouTube is the watermark - and I'll trade that little bit of promo for the clear SEO advantages that exists between Google and YouTube. I've done the homework on this one: 5 websites with essentially the same content / SEO tags: the one with the YouTube video pops to the top of the heap right away. Nuff said' - I'm not a fan of YouTube, but at least I'm not ignorant of it's capabilities.

  10. Jimm Fox from One Market Media, June 10, 2011 at 1:40 p.m.

    Interesting timing... yesterday YouTube announced announced the logoless player:

    http://youtube-global.blogspot.com/2011/06/next-step-in-embedded-videos-hd-preview.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+youtube/PKJx+(YouTube+Blog)

  11. Mark Shapiro, June 14, 2011 at 12:57 p.m.

    FYI - YouTube Blog says - re logoless player - "a small “YouTube” text label will still show up in the upper-right corner of a paused video when you hover over the player."

Next story loading loading..
About the Author

,