I think Digg is on to something by allowing its community to vote on the worthiness of a commercial.
With Digg Ads, the more an ad or commercial is dugg on Digg, the less an advertiser will have to pay to run the commercial. Conversely, the less the commercial is dugg on Digg, the deeper the advertiser will need to dig into its pocket to run the ad.
It’s a nice idea. But, I feel that it is rewarding the wrong group of people.
As it works now, Digg is allowing any steller efforts by the creative agency to pay off in lower media costs.
In my opinion, having a commercial dugg on Digg should lead to the creative agency being rewarded. The more the work is dugg, the more the creative agency should make. The less the work is dugg, the less the agency should be able to put in its pocket.
Of course, viewers’ opinions of commercials are voted on every day across the digital platform, not just on Digg.
Viewers vote through the amount of time they spend with the commercial. If they watch thirty out of thirty seconds, it’s a good indication that they have dugg the commercial. If they watch only five out of thirty seconds, then no, they haven't dugg the commercial.
View duration data for commercials offers advertisers the ability to start paying for creative on a performance basis. Performance, in this case, being the amount of time viewers choose to spend with the commercial.
Kudos to Digg for being one of the first to allow viewer behavior to affect cost.
Now, if they would only reward those who are actually accountable for being dugg.