In the Yahoo Video site, a channel is defined as:

"A channel is a series of videos from the same source or user. If you like a channel you can add it to your Favorites page."

Here's what a Yahoo Video channel looks like:

And here's an example of a YouTube channel:

Channel Comparison

Yahoo's channels have all the usual 'user-generated content' features - ratings, tags, subscribe buttons, review. To set up a video channel, you click on 'My Studio'. It's all pretty slick and has a 'professional' feel to it.

YouTube's channels seem a lot more social - and blog-like. You can view subscribers, connect with them, leave comments in channels, send messages, add the channel owner as a friend, etc. All the features you'd find on MySpace or another social network.

The channels I found on YouTube were predominantly of individuals, whereas on Yahoo I mostly found channels by entities such as website brands (or maybe I just didn't look hard enough). So I do get the sense that YouTube's channels are much more of a personal thing for YouTube users, whereas Yahoo is pitching their channels more like... well, more like a tv channel. But that distinction makes this quote from the YouTube press release seem kind of odd:

"YouTube said that it aims to move beyond depending on the latest hit videos, which spread like wild fire across the Internet via e-mail. Instead, it wants to create a personalized programming experience akin to TV viewers surfing channels with a remote control."

The "personalized programming experience" I can dig, but why compare that to tv channel surfing with a remote control? Ugh! I don't like this comparison to broadcast tv and I'm not sure why YouTube is going down that track, when they're promoting what is essentially a video social network. What's social about sitting on a couch and tv channel surfing?

Other than that, I like YouTube's more SNS approach. It'll be interesting to track YouTube and Yahoo as they each pursue online video channels in slightly different ways.