“YT gets a lot of comments because you’re looking at popular videos.”
I don’t doubt that more people prefer to watch vids than read. But the content is the same, so the difference shouldn’t be quite as extreme as it is in my case. I think the problem is that if one searches for a topic, the blog entries appear in search engines far down on the list (if at all, even though I have made them searchable).
That’s not what I’m saying. I have a video with over a million views, and it has lots of comments. My videos with fewer views have fewer comments. The ratio is in line with that 700/1 ratio.
“That’s not what I’m saying.”
I think we mean the same thing. But the ratio is not like that in my case. I not only get fewer views here, but also fewer comments per view. So there are two separate aspects: one is the number of views (which one might be able to influence), and the second is the likelihood of comments (which one probably can’t influence).
You can influence the number of comments by increasing the number of views.
“You can influence the number of comments by increasing the number of views.”
I think we all already understood and agreed to that. :-)
But like I said, I don’t want to advertise, or want just people that I know to comment; I wish people would find it when the are interested in something, but the entries don’t show up in search engines well enough. I suspect that people go to YouTube and then search there; it seems that they don’t do that as much on blogsites.
Youtube is the second biggest search engine in the world.
“Youtube is the second biggest search engine in the world.”
YouTube isn’t a search engine, because the search function only searches YouTube itself, not other sites.
@aplantage when i said “Genuine people very rarely comment” i meant that the average person finding a blog through search engines (not on WP) will rarely, if ever, comment, whereas spammers do it constantly through search engines.
“when i said ‘Genuine people very rarely comment’ i meant that …”
I understood that, and I agree. It’s nice of you all to comment on this so much :-), but the point seems to be getting lost somehow:
There seem to be two reasons for few comments:
1) People who might be interested in the topic don’t find the posts.
2) Few people who find them comment.
These two reasons are additive (they don’t exclude each other). Again, one might be able to influence 1) to some extent, but probably not 2).
Have you tagged the posts with key words that people may use in search in search engines? Or have you got key words in your posts that people may use in search engines? Google don’t just bring up tags they also bring up posts that includes the words someone has used in search. You just can’t make people comment if they don’t want to, it’s that simple. I have seen many posts over the years that i have really liked, but i still haven’t commented on them. Google index comments, and that puts some people off.
Yes, I have tagged, and both the titles and the texts contain keywords that people would search for if they are interested in the topic. (This pertains to what I called point 1)).
Yes, like I said, I realize that not all people comment. But a much higher percentage does on YT. So I wondered why. Perhaps they find videos less difficult to comment on than texts (and my texts my be relatively complicated). (This pertains to point 2).
If someone just likes a text but does not want to comment, there is a “like” function here, same as on YT.
Almost every Youtube video i look at has arguments going on in the comments, is that what you want? Listening to a music video or watching something on a video is different to reading a blog. You can’t compare Youtube to WordPress because they are two entirely different things. Youtube is probably 80% young people (kids), and young people are not interested in reading blogs. As for the ‘like’, people have to be logged in to WordPress to like, just the same as on Youtube.
“is that what you want?”
This is going somewhat off topic, but:
1) I wasn’t comparing YT with WP in every regard.
2) What’s wrong with debate, as long as it’s intelligent? I think we’re having one right here and now. :-)
3) My experience with YT has been positive, and I believe that the type of response has a lot to do with the kind of content that is posted.
4) It is no longer true that only kids use YT. The stats there show demographic breakdowns of the users of one’s channel, and in case those aren’t accurate, I’ve “met” people there (corresponded with them via pm etc). Many are my age, also academics etc.
5) Certainly one has to be logged in to “like” – but since this is true for both YT and WP, it is not relevant for the question at hand.
I’m mainly interested in movies, so my topics on YT are the same as on WP; the two platforms could even complement each other. I believe that it is possible to enjoy movies and discuss them intelligently. So I’m surprised at the extremely negative comments about YT here. Could it be that an old-fashioned prejudice of “images are dumb and words are intelligent” are at the root of this, even in the era of the internet? :-)
Youtube comments are not debates. They are arguments started by trolls. This thread was originally about spam comments, and i don’t think there’s anything more to add, as everyone has answered about that, and we are not supposed to debate in the forum, which is what this is becoming.
“Youtube comments are not debates. They are arguments started by trolls.”
In this generality, this statement is wrong.
The topic ‘old spam’ is closed to new replies.