Screaming Frog launches v17, YouTube Shorts algorithm explained and GSC report update rollout

Or get it on:

• Apple iTunes
• Anchor
• Breaker
• Google Podcasts
• Overcast
• Pocket Casts
• RadioPublic
• Spotify
• Stitcher

Show notes and links

In this week's episode, Jack Chambers-Ward is reunited with his co-host, Mark Williams-Cook to discuss all the latest SEO & PPC news including:

• Quick update on last week’s rollout of GSC indexing report - it's complete!
• V17 of Screaming Frog has been released
• Google linking to Youtube from organic product listings
• The Youtube Shorts algorithm explained

Transcript

Jack: Welcome to Episode 32 of Season 2 of the Search With Candour Podcast. My name is Jack Chambers-Ward, and this week I am joined by my co-host, Mr. Mark Williams-Cook. Welcome back, Mark.

Mark: Thank you.

Jack: I did a solo episode last week, folks. I don't know if you've already heard it, but it's nice to have you back, Mark. It was very weird for me to just talk at myself for 25 minutes.

Mark: I feel that. I did around 100 episodes just monologging. I got comfortable with the sound of my voice, but much happier doing it with you.

Jack: Yeah. It's nice to bring the old band back together again, to talk about some SEO and PPC news. And this week we will be talking about a quick update on something I mentioned last week, funnily enough. I talked about the update reporting from Google Search Console. There's been a quick update on that I'll touch on very briefly. Version 17 of Screaming Frog has been released with their updated release notes. Google is linking to YouTube from organic product listings, and we have a rough explanation of how the algorithm works for YouTube shorts.

Jack: Search With Candour is supported by SISTRIX, the SEO's toolbox. Go to sistrix.com/swc if you want to check out some of their fantastic free tools, such their SERP snippet validator, Hreflang validator, checking out your site's visibility index, or the Google update tracker. You can also go to sistrix.com/trends for TrendWatch, and I'll kind of give you a little update on that later on in the show.

Jack: So, as I mentioned, I did a solo episode last week, and I briefly touched on some of the new reporting that is happening in Google Search Console. They originally announced this way back in June, saying oh, we're rolling out over the next few months, that kind of thing, and I thought I better touch on it now. We haven't mentioned it on the show previously. Little did I know, between me recording and the episode publishing, they would confirm it has rolled out now. So we now have the updated coverage report on Google Search Console.

Essentially, what it breaks down to is the issue statuses, so what you previously had with excluded and valid with warning and all that kind of stuff, they are now grouped together. So pages with excluded and error issues are now grouped into the status called No Indexed, and pages with valid and valid with warning issues are now grouped into Indexed. So you now have just two different statuses, Indexed and Not Indexed. It's a much simpler and much cleaner look, I think.

Basically I wasn't expecting it to happen so quickly. I joked about it, oh, it'll probably happened in the next few weeks, you know Google. And then Search Liaison Daniel Weisberg just confirmed it a couple of days after I recorded the podcast. So yeah, if you're wondering what was happening last week, it's now available to you, go and check it out. There is a little start tour button if you haven't had a look at it already, if you go to your coverage report on Google Search Console.

Mark: I think probably the most interesting thing for me on the updated report is now in the section which is, why pages aren't indexed, which obviously we had a version of before, something new they've added is a source column. That's defined as whether the condition listed in the reason column is caused by the website or by Google. If the reason is a website action you should fix the issue, if it makes sense to do so. So in this example I'm looking at, we've got things like 404s, no index tags, soft 404s and they're all listed as website. They're things we can fix. And we've got obviously the very popular crawl, not currently indexed, discovered, not currently indexed, they're down as Google systems. So they're potentially not something we at least have immediate power over. Because I mean, links would probably fix that, links fix everything. But I just thought that was quite useful. Maybe for again, people running their own sites who maybe don't know that much about SEO, just to let them hone down into things they could be doing versus things that they can't really affect.

Jack: Definitely. I think that helps when it comes to reporting as well. When you're trying to understand and explain it to, whether that's somebody in your company or a client you are reporting to, or as you said, you're getting to know your own websites through Google Search Console, it's a good idea to know what you can and can't fix actively essentially. So you're not trying to waste time, oh yeah, I'll fix this thing and you spend hours trying to research it and turns out Google will do it eventually, just leave it alone. It'll be fine, kind of thing. So yeah, I think it's a nice update. I think they've tidied up a lot of the stuff for the indexing report on the coverage report, which is nice to see. And I know as you said, there's some controversial updates with discovered not currently indexed and all that kind of stuff. So it's nice to see everything have a bit more clarity to it on Search Console.

Mark: So we have version 17 of Screaming Frog launched in the last week. It's quite a big update. Few things are worth mentioning. They have now, and I'll go through these, a new issues tab. We have a new links tab. We have a new limits functionality and some other UI tweaks. So interesting changes, quite a lot of excitement in general, I think from the SEO community about this update, because it has improved, I think, Screaming Frog fairly significantly.

Interestingly, I commented about this on Twitter. To me, I mean, we use Screaming Frog internally, obviously with a whole bunch of other tools. Sitebulb is probably the nearest one, our old sponsor for last season, that we've used. And I use them at the moment, or I have always done, for separate tasks. So Screaming Frog has always been super quick at crawling sites. So normally things like migrations or a first look, I always tend to go to Screaming Frog. When I'm doing audits, I'd probably start with Sitebulb. Generally, because Sitebulb built in has their engine on, okay, here's the data I've seen, therefore this is what I think the issues are and tries to give them a priority.

Jack: I think the priority there is key. And it's something we talked about in our recent Q and A, when we were talking about how to prioritize tasks. I totally agree with you. Since you introduced me to Sitebulb, funnily enough Mark, that is exactly how I use Screaming Frog and Sitebulb as well. And it's very interesting to see Screaming Frog, because it is such a key name, a household name in the SEO community at this point. It's very interesting to see them really expand it and now we actually have warnings and issues and opportunities and all that kind of stuff introduced into the interface as well.

Mark: Yeah. So this issues tab again, similar to Sitebulb, you've got an issue type, so say whether it is actually an issue, something you need to fix, a warning where something could be wrong or an opportunity. And then again, it tries to give it some priority and it's quite helpful, shows you how many URLs this occurs on. Again, the table format it's in, I think is quite good as an overview. I had a quick look at this. So I love playing with new toys. So I ran it on some sites I'm quite familiar with and then ran their crawl analysis, got these issues. I mean, some of the things for me, I mean, we've got things here like meta description over 155 characters as an opportunity and it's like a medium priority. So I mean, for me, I still think probably in terms of the issue stuff, Sitebulb's got the edge on the prioritization stuff because I mean, that would be pretty far down.

Jack: Something we talked about before as well. And I know when I first joined Candour, how you really sold Sitebulb to me was how they explain the issues and the depth and analysis and stuff like that. Not that it's saying that it does, but it almost writes a lot of your audit notes for you because it is so detailed. They link out to a specific post on the Sitebulb site and said, this is why this is a thing. Here are some possible solutions and possible causes. Here's links to those other things where they could link to another part of the analysis you're doing. It's really detailed. And I think this is certainly a step towards that, but I think you're right that Sitebulb, because they've been doing it a bit longer, and it's a bit more of a involved, like you said, more of an auditing tool, I think Sitebulb still have the edge there for me in terms of the level of description and stuff that you're getting.

I would almost say that maybe Sitebulb is a bit more user friendly if you're not as experienced. It gives you a hint about the priority a bit clearer to me, especially if you're talking about duplicate meta descriptions. I know plenty of people, and I was guilty of this back in the day when I first started working on websites four or five years ago, spending hours and hours plotting out a full meta description of the entire site. I mean like, okay, each URL needs its own meta description, perfectly honed, the exact amount of characters and things like that. I don't do that anymore, I hasten to add. But yes, I think that's definitely a thing to take with a grain of salt, I think a lot of these. if you know what you're doing, I think a lot of this stuff is still heading in the right direction.

Mark: So Screaming Frog do actually as well give each of these issues a description and how to fix within the app. But you're absolutely right. So when I do training now on auditing, I lean quite heavily on the Sitebulb links to explain it to people that are learning, but Screaming Frog has done this. So actually for all these issues they've got in the app a description how to fix and the potential actions are provided in English, German, Spanish, French and Italian.

Jack: That's pretty impressive. That's very cool.

Mark: Very impressive. And the quip you made there about copying this into audits, I find this quite funny because under issue details, they literally have a copy button. Obviously it is helpful to explain it to people, but it's a little bit on the nose. There's a copy button there immediately. So I'm sure we'll see some more high quality audits from certain people generate from this, but actually really impressive. If you don't have budget for multiple tools, definitely huge improvement in the capability of Screaming Frog.

Jack: Absolutely.

Mark: Yeah. So really, really helpful. The next thing they're doing as well is around links analysis. So there is a new links tab, which they are saying, helps better identify link based issues. And I think this is super important. So this is things like pages with high crawl depth. So if they're buried deep in your site, of course they'll be hard to find for users and search engines won't count them as that important.

Jack: On a recent audit here in the studio, we bumped into a crawl depth of 156, which was fun.

Mark: How do you even do that?

Jack: Excellent question. We were trying to work that out. I think it was probably a spider trap that got caught in some almost infinite loop of categories and stuff. But yeah, it was like two, six, three, four, 156, three, four. You're like, huh, that's the outlier there. That's a bit weird.

Mark: So yeah, the links tab will give you all this information as well as pages using no follow on internal links, or non-descriptive anchor text, which is obviously a big one, descriptive anchor text, internal links, especially super helpful. So again, it's cornered one of the main things I think a lot of onsite technical SEOs focus on, which is internal linking, we all know is important. So now you've got tools to do that a lot better than we used to.

Probably my favorite new feature is around limits. Specifically now there is a limit by URL path configuration. So you can enter a list of URL patterns and then a maximum number of pages to crawl for each. So for instance, say you are reviewing a big travel site that's got thousands of locations it's reviewed, and you're just doing a technical audit of the templates. You can find the URL pattern and just say, okay, I just want a sample of 100 or 500 of these pages. So you can see if there are any systematic errors there. Rather than spending hours and hours crawling millions of pages.

Jack: Yep. It's something I've heard you recommend to us here in this studio, newer members of Candour, but including myself, where if you've got a general idea of what the template for that particular page type is doing, you're probably okay from a technical perspective. You don't need to analyze all 3 million product pages and all 10,000 category pages, get a sample. And I think that's really good, like you said, so you don't get stuck, I'll start my Screaming Frog call at eight o'clock in the morning and then come back to it. And it's like, oh, I need to leave at five. It's still going. It's on page 15 million or whatever it is. Actually limiting yourself there can help you get that quick snapshot and let you get a general idea without getting bogged down in too much of the details and stuff, I think is really, really useful.

Mark: You could do that sort of now. So I've been doing it recently, actually on some crawls we're doing, which is where you see it's got stuck down a particular hole on a site, you can pause the crawl and then you'd add an exclude in to stop it crawling more URLs, but this is a much better way to handle it because it's, you can set it and forget it, and it can go off and do what it's going to do. So they're the three new features I think are really cool in version 17 of Screaming Frog. They've got some other things on their blog post about it. So there's native Apple and RPM versions for Fedora, detachable tabs, just a few new UI tweaks. But if you are using Screaming Frog, I recommend downloading it. Excellent update from the team there.

Jack: As I mentioned at the top of the show, SISTRIX are working on a big data drop for the high performance content formats. I know I touched on this last week, a little bit of a tease from Steve and the team at SISTRIX about what they're working on at the moment. That will be coming out in a few weeks and we will be diving into that data in much more detail. But in the meantime we will, of course be discussing the TrendWatch, which is the summary of the new trending topics. IndexWatch, which is domains that have either won or lost from recent Google updates and industry shifts, and SectorWatch as well, which is a deep dive into the recent goings on in a particular industry sector.

So to keep up to date with what we are doing and to keep up update with what SISTRIX is doing, you can go and subscribe to TrendWatch, IndexWatch and SectorWatch and all the latest updates, by going to sistrix.com/trends and sistrix.com/blog.

Mark: So this was a particularly interesting thing that was picked up by Brian Freiesleben, who I think Jack, you spotted we've mentioned him before on the podcast.

Jack: Yeah. All the way back in episode 11. So a few months ago now. And I mean episode 11 of season two, of course, when I was on the show. But yeah, it's very interesting cropping up distinctive surname here. So I was like, oh yeah, Freiesleben. I recognize that surname. And in fact we have talked about Brian before. Brian's doing great work on Twitter.

Mark: So if you don't follow him on Twitter already, you can find him at @type_SEO. And what Brian flagged was Google appears to be linking now directly to YouTube from organic product listing ads. So the product listing ads, as again, we covered before in the show notes, where we used to have the Google shopping feeds from the merchant center that you'd use for your Google ads campaigns, a while back Google decided they would also start showing organic listings from these as well. So unpaid listings, you don't have to pay necessarily to get the product shown, perhaps as a way to compete with the wider inventory of sites like Amazon.

And what Brian has noted is where we're seeing these product listing ads, and we'll put a screenshot in the show notes at search.withcandour.co.uk, is you've got the product image, you've got the store it comes from, the title, the review, the price, and on some of them now we just have a little link with the anchor text YouTube, which is linking off to the reviews and this is on mobile SERPs. So this is quite interesting. There's some speculation Brian's had about whether YouTube comments are also used as a source of information for Google when they're evaluating the review content. He did manage to find some examples though, where the YouTube review for the product that was linked to by Google was actually by the brand who made the product.

Jack: Of course.

Mark: And I thought that was interesting because we've covered recently quite a few of the Google product updates. And they've been really hammering on about this E-A-T and this...

Jack: Pros and cons stuff we've been talking about a lot recently.

Mark: Yeah. Pros and cons, and you have to own the product. And obviously if you are linking to your own review of your own product, it's probably not going to be as non-biased as someone else or a third party could be. But again, it's another, obviously we talked about TikTok on the show in terms of SEO and I've seen a few people, that's become a little bit of an interesting topic recently. And some people saying they don't class it as a search engine, but I think for quite a while, most people accepted YouTube was a search engine because it was the site where in the UK, the second highest amount of searches every month were being done, more than Bing. The difference being, obviously it's just covering one vertical, how TikTok's obviously covering stuff just on its platform. But what this does is, again plays funnily enough into Google properties, but it is another reason maybe to consider for all types of websites, especially e-comm now, to be producing video content to do these reviews. It'd be interesting to see if these PLAs ever link to any other video site apart from YouTube.

Jack: That's exactly what I was about to wonder, because in fact, when I had Annie-Mai talking on the show about TikTok, we were looking at TikTok videos appearing on SERPs as well. So, and we know for a fact, and this has been studied pretty extensively, that Google doesn't favor YouTube necessarily as a video platform. If you've listed an answer to a question on Vimeo, you're just as likely to get ranked for a thing as if you've done the exact same process on YouTube or another video platform.

So yeah, I am very interested to see if there's, judging by Google's previous history, I would guess that they wouldn't necessarily prioritize YouTube. But yeah, I don't know. We also talked about verification and how much can you trust information on TikTok and stuff like that? There are no E-A-T processes, no E-A-T pretty much at all on TikTok. And there's a lot of rubbish and charlatans and people selling terrible knockoffs that don't do the thing it's supposed to do. Oh, it's a tricky one. I have a feeling they will, but I do worry about a lot of misinformation being exposed in that way. What do you think Mark, if you had to dip into your crystal ball and have a think?

Mark: I think it's all interesting timing with Google saying, more searches are happening on TikTok with Gen Z, for products and such, maybe to draw the eye away from the whole, we're a massive monopoly in terms of search. And then while everyone's looking the other way, suddenly they've got, funnily enough, look, product reviews on YouTube, and we're going to talk about YouTube shorts as well, which is a similar format to TikTok. So again, I think, we've seen it, not that I want to go into it too deeply, we've seen some of the internal documents from, we'll just say various companies like Google, where they've aggressively been copying competitors and trying to eat up market share when they see user behavior changing. So it wouldn't surprise me if they start leaning heavier onto video, especially the shorts stuff.

Jack: Speaking of YouTube shorts, we're going to dive into a little bit of an explanation from a representative from YouTube about how the algorithm works for YouTube shorts, specifically the mixtures of length of content and all that kind of stuff that creators are doing on YouTube, and all that kind of stuff. But if you don't already know what a YouTube short is, we did touch on it a little bit in the TikTok episode. Like I said, we discussed essentially what Annie-Mai described as TikTok-ification of other platforms. I can hear Mark's teeth grinding from across the room here, but essentially it's YouTube trying to do a TikTok. They are short form vertical format video, created using a smartphone and uploaded directly to YouTube, usually through the YouTube studio app or creator app and things like that. You can also edit in the app, very much like TikTok as well. And if you are a viewer rather than a creator, you can find those shorts on your YouTube homepage. There is a little shorts tab in the YouTube app and you can also find it on every channel homepage as well, if they have uploaded any shorts, you can see it as a subcategory of their video is there as well. And I've noticed it a lot. I don't know about you Mark, but I consume a lot of YouTube content. Even while I'm working here, I'll have YouTube videos in the background.

Mark: What?

Jack: On my big screen, just not doing any work. No. I'll have YouTube playing in the background. I have YouTube Premium, so I can just lock the screen and have a podcast that's on YouTube or whatever, a talk show or whatever it is, just on in the background. And I worry, every time I dread to see my YouTube usage stats every week from my phone, they're often terrifying. And yeah, I've seen a lot of shorts. I've seen a lot of creators dip into shorts and essentially use them as a highlights, clips kind of thing.

It was a big trend and we're getting off onto a very big YouTube discussion here, but the length of content on YouTube has been such a contentious thing over the last few years, over the last 5, 10 years or so. Everybody had to be super short at first, 5 to 10 years ago, then you had to be longer than 10 minutes in order to be monetizable and be able to add ads in and stuff like that. Then YouTube started favoring long form stuff. The more ads you can put in the better, kind of thing. And now we're back round the other way. And I saw a lot of creators doing this, where they would create a second channel called Search With Candour clips or Search With Candour highlights, where they would take little snippets, like what we do for our social media posts. If you ever see our little audiograms that we do, where it's the little wave form, our faces, and then you'll see the subtitles scrolling along and going along with the words and stuff like that.

People do the equivalent of that for their YouTube clips, will take out a 90 second clip and they would have an entire channel dedicated just to that. And they started to do really big numbers. And I find that fascinating. And now with YouTube shorts, you can do that all in one channel from one platform. So I think we're seeing a lot of people mix the length of content and stuff like that. So should we dive into a bit of the updates from YouTube and actually get into some data and some analysis?

Mark: Yeah. I just checked my screen time to answer the question about YouTube. It says last week, how long do you think I spent on YouTube, in the app, on my phone?

Jack: Last week. Nine hours.

Mark: Less.

Jack: Really? God, mine's going to be terrifying. Four hours?

Mark: Less.

Jack: Two.

Mark: Less.

Jack: 30 minutes.

Mark: Less.

Jack: What do you do all day?

Mark: 16 minutes.

Jack: 16 minutes.

Mark: Yes.

Jack: Oh no.

Mark: 16 minutes, but 1 hour 28 minutes on LinkedIn. So I'm going to read out some of these answers that YouTube gave us about how the shorts algorithm work, while you... Or have you found it?

Jack: I've found it. So to put it in perspective, I've watched more YouTube today than you have for the entire... I've got 02:23 for YouTube so far.

Mark: 2 hours, 23 minutes.

Jack: Yeah. One hour 17 minutes of TikTok, two hours and 23 minutes of...

Mark: How long is that for, two hours and 23 minutes?

Jack: That's today.

Mark: Just today.

Jack: Just today.

Mark: Cool. Right.

Jack: 32 hours this week. How about that?

Mark: Wow.

Jack: I warned you.

Mark: So YouTube have answered some questions about the shorts algorithm that might be helpful for people, especially with what we were just talking about, might be beneficial to look at more YouTube content. So I'm just going to read out the questions and then directly, essentially, what the representatives from YouTube said, just to get this across to you. So should I mix long and short form content on the same channel? And YouTube said, "We've done some analysis recently where we looked at audience growth for channels that only made long form videos and channels that made both long form and short videos. Channels that made short actually seemed to be growing faster. We anticipate that audience demand for short form content is here to stay. This is a format that's becoming increasingly popular and the very reason we've been testing so much more in mobile first creation tools and shorts discovery."

Jack: Like I said, anecdotally, I can confirm that. I see a lot of shorts going on. I see a lot of channels and creators I follow doing both long form and short form content now, for sure.

Mark: Where did Vine go? I mean weren't they first?

Jack: It went out business. Twitter bought it and then it just disappeared.

Mark: They were first on board this boat.

Jack: Yeah. Anyway, a lot of people spend a lot of time watching Vine compilations on YouTube and TikTok these days.

Mark: So the second question was, will YouTube recommend more long form videos if people watch my shorts? Good question. YouTube said, "Viewers watching shorts aren't always the same viewers watching long form content."

Jack: We were talking about search intent for TikTok and stuff like that, that totally makes sense. They're not necessarily the same intent for people wanting quick answers or in depth analysis. That totally makes sense to me.

Mark: Is it that, or is it a generational thing, do you think? Or both?

Jack: Bit of both, I think. Yeah, absolutely.

Mark: So YouTube says, "For this reason we separate short and long form content from watch history. So when someone discovers a new channel via shorts, we're not currently using that to inform what longer videos are recommended to them outside of the shorts experience."

Jack: Yep. I noticed this as well. Again, I use YouTube a lot, but yes, I've noticed, so if you accidentally or purposefully go and watch a short while you are currently watching a full length, long form content video, you can come back to that long content video and pick up where you left off. It doesn't push it down into the watch history. They're actually going to separate it out into their own little silos, essentially. So yeah, that, from me very anecdotally as a user, that totally makes sense to me as well.

Mark: Is there a benefit to starting a separate channel for shorts?

Jack: What I mentioned earlier, I saw this a lot happening over the last couple of years.

Mark: "Try to group your channels around similar audiences who enjoy the same or similar content. Separate them out when your viewers have totally different interests. If you start building up different audiences with different interests, then consider making a separate channel." That sounds like a yes to me if you're starting out.

Jack: Yeah, I would think so. I think it depends on, so they haven't used the term intent here necessarily, but different audiences I think is the key phrase there. Like you were saying just there Mark, whether that is a generational thing or you are creating the short form, low attention span kind of content for one audience. And here is five, one minute clips from an hour and a half long documentary. And this is just the bang, little snippet highlights. That could be two very different audiences. I think there is definitely a lot of, and again, from talking to people I know who have YouTube channels, who run YouTube channels for other creators and stuff like that, creating separate channels has now become quite a big factor.

Say for example, we did this podcast on YouTube as a full half an hour, 40 minute, hour long thing, and we also did a version of your Unsolicited SEO Tips as a thing as well, there would be an argument to have a Search With Candour channel and a Unsolicited SEO Tips channel as two separate things, because the people who want to listen to the podcast aren't necessarily the same people that want the little tips. And I know there's some channels that cover different things. They have different interests. They ended up splitting off into multiple channels and things like that. So yeah, again, very much anecdotally, for me as a user, I see this as a pattern, as a trend in creators as well.

Mark: They answered that in the previous question as well, when they literally said, "Viewers watching shorts, aren't always the same viewers watching longer form content." And then they answered this question by saying, "Group the channels around similar audiences." So cool. And lastly, the last question I answered was, how many shorts do I need to upload before the algorithm...

Jack: The algorithm.

Mark: The algorithm recommends my content and YouTube said, "Every short is given a chance to succeed no matter the channel or the number of videos on the channel. Performance of a short is dictated by whether or not people are choosing to watch and not skip a video in the shorts feed." Sounds like some other video app I know.

Jack: That's weird, isn't it? Yeah.

Mark: "That audience engagement is often built over time as opposed to happening instantaneously."

Jack: That, ladies and gentlemen, is TikTok-ification right there. That is the definition. That is almost word for word, how TikTok describe their quote, unquote ranking factors for their video stuff. Basically if you're creating video content, they say every video is given an equal opportunity to rank. And if you search for a thing, you could have no videos or you could have a million videos you've been creating on TikTok for five minutes or five months, it doesn't matter. Almost word for word what YouTube is saying here about shorts. Doesn't surprise me at all, but I'm also incredibly skeptical of it because how do you decide then? Everyone has equal opportunities. I don't think they do though, do they? That's not how things work.

But yeah, I think the audience engagement, the engagement metrics is such a key thing, on TikTok. And they're very clearly a key thing here on shorts as well. Annie-Mie talked about a thing I use a lot on TikTok, which is the, I'm not interested button when you get recommended a thing that is not something you want to be seeing more of, you can hold down on the screen and say, not interested. I guess the equivalent of that on the YouTube shorts would be the dislike button or skipping away as fast as you can. But I think the active engagement to dislike a thing is often a stronger signal to say, yeah, I want to see less of this thing. Rather than just flicking past, you could do that accidentally. There's plenty of other factors there. So it's basically TikTok is essentially what we've learned.

Mark: Well, it's good, I think. Hopefully it's been helpful to give people some direct answers to some direct questions directly from YouTube around shorts. And maybe just some confirmation when you're planning your strategy around things like channels and how you want to proceed with video content.

Jack: Exactly, exactly.

Well, that's all we've got time for this week. Actually fairly short, even with just the two of us. Almost talked as long as I did by myself last week. There we go.

Thank you for joining me again, Mark. It's nice to have you back in the studio to discuss all the latest SEO and PPC news. As I said last week, and I've been saying for the last couple of weeks, we are planning to do some alive Q and As, most likely on LinkedIn coming up in the next few weeks and months. So do stay tuned for those. They will still be available in the podcast feeds. So you can tune in, live with us and do a Q and A, actively ask Mark and I questions and actually get involved, or you'll get it as a normal podcast in the podcast feed where you're listening to this right now.

So either way you won't miss it, don't worry. And yeah, as I said last week, I have got about 20 or 30 people on a waiting list for guests to record over the next few months. So I'm very, very excited for what is coming up. We're going to be covering a lot of different topics from a diverse cast of guests, I'm very much looking forward to interviewing and discussing SEO and PPC topics with. But until then, have a lovely week and thank you very much for listening.