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/
info@dalerioconsulting.com -
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/
info@dalerioconsulting.com
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
-
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 -
Moving to a new site while keeping old site live
For reasons I won't get into here, I need to move most of my site to a new domain (DOMAIN B) while keeping every single current detail on the old domain (DOMAIN A) as it is. Meaning, there will be 2 live websites that have mostly the same content, but I want the content to appear to search engines as though it now belongs to DOMAIN B. Weird situation. I know. I've run around in circles trying to figure out the best course of action. What do you think is the best way of going about this? Do I simply point DOMAIN A's canonical tags to the copied content on DOMAIN B and call it good? Should I ask sites that link to DOMAIN A to change their links to DOMAIN B, or start fresh and cut my losses? Should I still file a change of address with GWT, even though I'm not going to 301 redirect anything?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | kdaniels0 -
URL mapping for site migration
Hi all! I'm currently working on a migration for a large e-commerce site. The old one has around 2.5k urls, the new one 7.5k. I now need to sort out the redirects from one to the other. This is proving pretty tricky, as the URL structure has changed site wide. There doesn't seem to be any consistent rules either so using regex doesn't really work. By and large, the copy appears to be the same though. Does anybody know of a tool I can crawl the sites with that will export the crawled url and related copy into a spreadsheet? That way I can crawl both sites and compare the copy to match them up. Thanks!
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Blink-SEO0 -
Redirecting non www site
Hello Ladies and Gentlemen. I 100% agree with the redirecting of the non www domain name. After all we see so many times, especially in MOZ how the two different domains contain different links, different DA and of course different PA. So I have posed the question to our IT company, "How would we go about redirecting our non www domain to the www version?", "Where would we do that?", " we cant do the redirect on our webserver because the website is listed as an IP address, not a domain name, so would we do the redirect somewhere at GoDaddy?" who is currently maintain our DNS record So here is the response from IT: " I would setup a CNAME record in DNS (GoDaddy), such that no matter if you go to the bare domain, or the www, you end up in the same place. As for SEO, having a 301 redirect for your bare domain isn't necessary, because both the bare domain and the www are the same domain. 301 is a redirect for "permanently moved" and is common when you change domain names. Using the bare domain or the www are NOT DIFFERENT DOMAINS, so the 301 would not be accurate, and you'd be telling engines you've moved, when you haven't - which may negatively impact your rank. It sounds to me that IT is NOT recommending the redirect. How can this be? Or are we talking about two different things? Will the redirect cause the melt down as the IT company suggests? Or do they nut understand SEO?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | Davenport-Tractor0 -
Outbound Links to Authority sites
Will outbound links to a related topic on an authority site help, hurt or be irrelevanent for SEO purposes. And if beneficially, should it be Nofollow?
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | VictorVC0 -
So What On My Site Is Breaking The Google Guidelines?
I have a site that I'm trying to rank for the Keyword "Jigsaw Puzzles" I was originally ranked around #60 or something around there and then all of a sudden my site stopped ranking for that keyword. (My other keyword rankings stayed) Contacted Google via the site reconsideration and got the general response... So I went through and deleted as many links as I could find that I thought Google may not have liked... heck, I even removed links that I don't think I should have JUST so I could have this fixed. I responded with a list of all links I removed and also any links that I've tried to remove, but couldn't for whatever reasons. They are STILL saying my website is breaking the Google guidelines... mainly around links. Can anyone take a peek at my site and see if there's anything on the site that may be breaking the guidelines? (because I can't) Website in question: http://www.yourjigsawpuzzles.co.uk UPDATE: Just to let everyone know that after multiple reconsideration requests, this penalty has been removed. They stated it was a manual penalty. I tried removing numerous different types of links but they kept saying no, it's still breaking rules. It wasn't until I removed some website directory links that they removed this manual penalty. Thought it would be interesting for some of you guys.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | RichardTaylor0 -
Badges For a B2b site
love this seo tactic but it seems hard to get people to adopt it Has anyone seen a successful badge campaign for a b2b site? please provide examples if you can.
Intermediate & Advanced SEO | | DavidKonigsberg0