Bing has added social media icon links to the knowledge panels of celebrities in the Bing knowledge panel, following Google’s own addition of them to the panel, but there is one glaring omission from most of the knowledge panels… YouTube. And while YouTube is the obvious exclusion, Bing is also not including Google+ or Tumblr either.
Here is another example:
Now when you compare Justin Timberlake’s knowledge panel from Bing with the one from Google, you see that Bing has omitted both Google+ and YouTube, which are Google properties, as well as MySpace – although to be fair, Timberlake is a co-owner of MySpace (really).
While one could argue Tumblr, MySpace and Google+ might not be big enough to warrant a profile link, the omission of YouTube is quite spectacular and definitely seems deliberate, especially for those celebrities who are in the music industry.
However, they do have the ability to show YouTube as one of the social links – they just choose not to in the vast majority of cases. The only cases where they seem to show YouTube links is when the person in question is really only known for being a YouTube personality, without much of a social presence outside of YouTube. Case in point:
Here is another example of a YouTube celebrity, Michelle Phan who made her mark with YouTube makeup tutorials. Yet she does not have a YouTube link, despite the knowledge panel snippet stating she is a YouTube personality. Bing defaults to Wikipedia, Twitter and Facebook.
Even the knowledge panel for Google in Bing’s search results includes their Twitter and Facebook links, but not one to YouTube or Google+.
The same holds true for other brands too. Disney, which is the top brand on YouTube, doesn’t have a YouTube link.
In fact, none of the top brands on YouTube have a YouTube link in their knowledge panel, although they do have a variety of other links included, depending on the brand.
Is Bing deliberately excluding promoting Google’s YouTube? Because Bing clearly has the ability to show it based on the PewDiePie example, the fact it is omitting it from many other social profiles, even for those people who are known for being YouTube celebrities, is pretty telling.
Is it a markup issue? Since all of the examples above show the YouTube link in Google, it would seem that isn’t the problem.
Is it because YouTube is owned by Google? That would be the logical reason why it is excluded.
Latest posts by Jennifer Slegg (see all)
- New Google Quality Rater Guidelines, Update Adds Emphasis on Needs Met - October 16, 2020
- Google Updates Experiment Statistics for Quality Raters - October 6, 2020
- Analyzing “How Google Search Works” Changes from Google - July 8, 2020
- Google Quality Rater Guidelines Update: New Introduction, Rater Bias & Political Affiliations - December 6, 2019
- Google Updates Quality Rater Guidelines: Reputation for News Sites; Video Content Updates; Quality for Information Sites - September 13, 2019