This Week in Publish or Perish: Money or Engagement? YouTube vs. Facebook Live

Video content is quickly becoming one of the most powerful ways to breakthrough information clutter. Do you know which platform is best for your needs, though? With such a large amount of platforms available for video production and publishing, it’s easy to get lost in the details. In this week’s episode of Publish or Perish, podcast host Jeff Leo Herrmann discusses the pros and cons of using YouTube vs. Facebook Live for your video marketing efforts.

Listen to the podcast above for the full details—or find an overview of the top 4 elements to consider when deciding between YouTube and Facebook Live below.

  1. Clutter and Discoverability

YouTube: Given that YouTube is an older video platform, it’s extremely cluttered so it can be difficult for a video to stand out. It is highly searchable, though, so a well-optimized video still has a chance.

Facebook: Video—especially live video—is newer to Facebook, which has responded by prioritizing video in newsfeeds and therefore making them more discoverable.

  1. Engagement Rates

YouTube: Along with the oversaturation of video content on YouTube, engagement tends to be much lower unless you already have a captive audience.

Facebook: As videos are given the spotlight on Facebook, they notoriously see higher engagement rates in comparison to content posts on Facebook as well as video posts on other platforms.

  1. Ability to Embed

YouTube: One of YouTube’s strongest features is the fact that it allows users to create video libraries, which can be embedded on other websites or on social profiles, such as LinkedIn. This allows video creators to foster stronger thought leadership and get more out of videos over time.

Facebook: While Facebook does offer the same ability to upload videos that YouTube does, it doesn’t have the same capabilities in terms of archiving videos and easily embedding them.

  1. Going Live vs. Publishing Edited Video

YouTube: This platform’s model is based on its users investing time, and sometimes money, in creating, editing, and publishing their videos. Accordingly, YouTube has an established monetization model, which allows popular YouTube personalities to easily make money from their efforts.

Facebook: On the other hand, Facebook—especially Facebook live—takes less production effort, making it easier to share information in real time and build brand credibility. The platform does not currently have a monetization engine, though.

Facebook and YouTube each offer their own set of advantages and disadvantages. That doesn’t mean marketers have to stick with one platform, though. Find ways to mix and match these two popular video social channels in ways that complement your business goals. Listen to the Publish or Perish podcast to learn more about leveraging YouTube and Facebook Live to your advantage.

Victoria Grieshammer

About Victoria Grieshammer

Victoria Grieshammer is the Marketing Coordinator of Content Development at Fathom. Formerly, she was the Head of Marketing on the Fathom Manufacturing team. Victoria joined Fathom as an Associate Copywriter after graduating from Allegheny College with degrees in English and Psychology. Her previous experience includes e-commerce copywriting at Little Tikes and coordinating social media campaigns for small businesses, giving her a varied background in digital marketing. When she’s not at Fathom writing and learning, you can find her jogging around Cleveland or reading a book. You can also find her on Twitter at @Vgrieshammer1.

Leave a Reply