How to delete video rich snippets?
-
Hi mozzaholics,
At first I was very happy to have video snippets appear in Google (200 pages), but now after 6 months I see a drop of almost -30% in traffic, whilst the average rank stayed the same, compared to the star snippets I have for other pages.
So I want to remove the video snippets and have the old rich snippets back. I tried removing the videositemap and google's the structured data tool doesn't show video snippets.
Does anybody know what else I can do to remove the video snippets? Is there anybody who succeeded deleting them? Please share your wisdom.
Ivo
-
Are you looking to remove every single video snippet? Or just the snippets from some pages? It seems fairly drastic to remove every one, so I'd suggest you delve a bit deeper and work out exactly which pages you don't want the snippet on any more. That way, you can submit a sitemap with some URLs, but not all.
Additionally, note that it's much easier to get the thumbnail changed than the snippet removed entirely, could you try split testing thumbnails to see if it's just suboptimal pictures that are causing you problems here, rather than the snippets as a whole?
If you can't take the videos down, I honestly think you'll struggle to get the snippets removed. Google are not on your side here unfortunately.
-
Hi Phil,
Thanks for your extensive answer. I saw your response before, when looking in to this problem, here on moz (loved your video btw) and elsewhere. It's too bad there isn't a guideline by Google we can follow.
I did remove the videositemap, but since these are the only video's on the site. I did not resubmit it. Do you recommend resubmitting an empty one (bit weird though)?
I can't take them off the website since it is high season in my industry and the video's do have added value to the visitor. I guess it's just not something he or she is expecting when looking (googling) for our product.
-
Hi Ivo,
I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but I think you're really going to struggle to get those snippets removed, especially since you've used YouTube embeds.
It seems that right now, once a video is indexed, it's very hard to get that snippet removed. You can get a difference video snippet indexed for the page, but Google don't seem to refresh the index regularly or re-crawl pages to determine whether the video attribution is still relevant that often either.
In instances where I have managed to get snippets removed, it's often taken months and there doesn't seem to be a huge level of consistency I can point to.
That said, here are my recommendations:
- Submit a new video sitemap with the appropriate pages taken out (don't just remove the old one)
- Take the videos off the page (and you probably want them off YouTube as well in your case).
- Ensure you don't have FB open graph tags or schema tags related to the video on the page.
- Once you've done all this, resubmit the page to GWMT and then hope for the best!
-
No the traffic went to our own website, but the CTR dropped after the video snippets appeared. So we want to go back to star rich snippets.
-
Was the issue that it was sending the traffic to youtube instead of your site? If that's the case have you considered a backlink friendly hosted video solution(Wistia is the onlu one I know).
I'm really curious about this particular scenario.
-
Thanks for answering. It's HTML
with a ref to Youtube. There is no rich snippet info surrounding it. The video sitemap did the trick. So removing the video sitemap seems the first step.
-
What have you used to put them in place in the first place? HTML, PHP, WordPress?
If I'm understand the question correctly if should just be a case of removing the rich snippets that are around your video information?
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
-
URL Inspector, Rich Results Tool, GSC unable to detect Logo inside Embedded schema
I work on a news site and we updated our Schema set up last week. Since then, valid Logo items are dropping like flies in Search Console. Both URL inspector & Rich Results test cannot seem to be able to detect Logo on articles. Is this a bug or can Googlebot really not see schema nested within other schema?Previously, we had both Organization and Article schema, separately, on all article pages (with Organization repeated inside publisher attribute). We removed the separate Organization, and now just have Article with Organization inside the publisher attribute. Code is valid in Structured Data testing tool but URL inspection etc. cannot detect it. Example: https://bit.ly/2TY9Bct Here is this page in URL inspector:
Technical SEO | | ValnetIncBy comparison, we also have Organization schema (un-nested) on our homepage. Interestingly enough, the tools can detect that no problem. That's leading me to believe that either nested schema is unreadable by Googlebot OR that this is not an accurate representation of Googlebot and it's only unreadable by the testing tools. Here is the homepage in URL inspector:
In pseudo-code, our OLD schema looked like this: The NEW schema set up has the same Article schema set up, but the separate script for Organization has been removed. We made the change to embed our schema for a couple reasons: first, because Google's best practices say that if multiple schemas are used, Google will choose the best one so it's better to just have one script; second, Google's codelabs tutorial for schema uses a nested structure to indicate hierarchy of relevancy to the page. My question is, does nesting schemas like this make it impossible for Googlebot to detect a schema type that's 2 or more levels deep? Or is this just a bug with the testing tools?
0 -
How to delete specific url?
I just ran drawl diagnostics and trying to delete pages such as "oops that page can't be found" or "404 (not found_ error response pages. Can anyone help?
Technical SEO | | sawedding0 -
Meta Description VS Rich Snippets
Hello everyone, I have one question: there is a way to tell Google to take the meta description for the search results instead of the rich snippets? I already read some posts here in moz, but no answer was found. In the post was said that if you have keywords in the meta google may take this information instead, but it's not like this as i have keywords in the meta tags. The fact is that, in this way, the descriptions are not compelling at all, as they were intended to be. If it's not worth for ranking, so why google does not allow at least to have it's own website descriptions in their search results? I undestand that spam issues may be an answer, but in this way it penalizes also not spammy websites that may convert more if with a much more compelling description than the snippets. What do you think? and there is any way to fix this problem? Thanks!
Technical SEO | | socialengaged
Eugenio0 -
Google+ Authorship, Rich Snippits and Three Names - a Problem?
Hello All, I have a conundrum that I thought I'd resolved - but that's popped its gnarly old head over the parapet again. I have a number of websites that I'd like to have show my ugly Google+ mug as author in the Google SERPS. I jumped through all the authorship verification hoops that Google threw at me and I thought I'd won. The problem? I have three names: Nick Beresford-Davies. One example of a page that I'm trying to achieve authorship with is: http://www.graphic-design-employment.com/illustrator-how-to-make-a-pattern.html I have verified authorship of the above website on my Google Profile:
Technical SEO | | Tinstar
https://plus.google.com/u/0/107765436751760696335/about Originally I footed the page with Nick Beresford-Davies (hyphenated) and the Structured Data Testing Tool ignored the hyphen and just saw Nick Beresford. So I tweaked my online name (to please Google!) to Nick Beresford Davies (no hyphen). Initially this seemed to work - but I just checked again and now Google, for reasons only known to itself, sees "nick davies" as the author, completely ignoring the name in the footer of the page (by Nick Beresford Davies) and the fact that the site has been verified by Google+. This is also the case for all other websites that I contribute to - and not all the bylines are in the footer - some are by the headline. When I test pages on the structured testing tool and enter my Google+ profile, it replies: nick davies, we've found your name as one of the authors from the page. You can use "Authorship verification by email" method above to verify your authorship.Error: Author name found on the page and Google+ profile name do not match. Please consider adding markup to the site.Much as I would like to succeed on the Google SERPS, I draw the line at changing my name to keep this robot happy - so if anyone has any suggestions, or can see any obvious step that I've missed, I'd be very grateful. I find it hard to believe that no other double-barrelled website author exists - so I'm hoping I'm not the only one to have experienced this... Thanks!0 -
Has Google stopped rendering author snippets on SERP pages if the author's G+ page is not actively updated?
Working with a site that has multiple authors and author microformat enabled. The image is rendering for some authors on SERP page and not for others. Difference seems to be having an updated G+ page and not having a constantly updating G+ page. any thoughts?
Technical SEO | | irvingw0 -
Why Google not picking My META Description? Google itself populate the description.. How to control this Search Snippets??
Why Google not picking My META Description? Google itself populate the description.. How to control this Search Snippets??
Technical SEO | | greyniumseo0 -
Will training videos available on the "members only" section of a site contribute to the sites ranking?
Hello, I got asked a question recently as to whether training videos on the deeper pages of a website (that you can only access if you are a member and log in) will help with the sites ranking. On the SEOMoz software these deeper pages have been crawled as far as I can tell with errors reported on pages from the "members only" section of the site, leading me to believe the members only pages and their content will contribute to the sites overall ranking profile. I have suggested uploading the informational videos on the main pages of the site for now, making them accessible to all visitors and putting them in a more obvious place to encourage more sharing and views, however I've also said I would check it out with some experts so any information will be greatly appreciated! Many thanks 🙂 Charlotte
Technical SEO | | CharlotteWaller0