With all the video options out there, how do you know which platform will work best for your option? The best thing you can do is look at the options. You’ve got the old and true platform, such as YouTube. You’ve got the new and hip platforms, such as Facebook Live and Snapchat. Let’s look at some of the pros and cons available:

YouTube: YouTube has been around since 2005. If you think video for the web, if you’re not thinking YouTube you should probably do some research. How many times do you visit a website and see a YouTube video? How many of those cute viral videos we’ve seen started on YouTube? If you think of it, many of the other video options we have available today can probably thank YouTube for at least being an inspiration for what they’re doing in video for the web.

Pros: Because it’s been around so long, YouTube is synonymous with video for the web. It also has a great cross-platform implementation model with its easy embed and share options.

Cons: YouTube is a great platform as platforms go. It is however, not as easily integrated for interaction and live-time response from your audience.

Facebook Live: When Facebook added in-house video options it was a game changer – in a few different ways. You can click a button and boom you’re livestreaming. Facebook has made some great advancements since its start in 2004 (and expansion to the general public in 2006).

Pros: Facebook added video to its social media platform. I can start a Facebook Live feed and Facebook notifies my followers that I’m broadcasting a live feed. If they like or comment on the video, their followers get a notification that they liked or commented on my video, opening my video to views from their network in addition to my own.

Cons: Facebook video does not play well with others. I can share a link to my Facebook video via my website or Twitter feed. The link takes the person directly to my Facebook video. However, the end user has to have a Facebook account to view the video. It is also a little more complicated to embed a Facebook video directly into another platform such as my website. While I can download the Facebook video after-the-fact and upload it to an external site, I cannot do that with a live feed for the video.

Snapchat: In the timeline of web video, Snapchat is still in its infancy. It does, however offer some great options on the fly, including stories. Snapchat filters provides even more fun at your fingertips.

Pros: Snapchat videos are a great way to get something out fast without a whole lot of effort. Want to be a rabbit to deliver a cute Easter message? Click on the filter and Snapchat’s face recognition makes it so – literally with the push of a button.

Cons: Snapchat works best with short videos. If you’re looking to get a longer video out there, you may want to look at other options. Another downside of Snapchat is that there is no desktop feature.

As with any other project, you’re going to want to consider what will work best with your audience. It may even make sense for you to utilize more than one video platform.

Leave a Reply