Common sense would indicate yes, wouldn’t it?
Okay, then how about this question? Does time spent with a commercial count as time spent with the product?
If so, then time spent with the commercial could serve as a proxy for dollars spent on that product.
The more time spent watching, the more dollars spent buying.
It is now easy to measure time spent with a commercial.
Digital data is readily available, cheap, relatively quick to acquire and, extremely accurate, since it’s an observed rather than a declared behavior. Which means validating time spent as a viable measure could offer a quick and handy source to automate the measurement of a commercial’s quality.
But still, advertisers are not holding their agencies accountable for delivering time spent. Nor are they paying them accordingly.
Instead they pay their agencies for the time the agency spends creating the commercial. Not the time the viewer spends watching it.
Why are advertisers still paying for effort when they could be paying for outcome?
Why are they refusing to hold their agencies accountable?
Why am I not surprised?