Looking ahead to the new YouTube model, if a Super Bowl contest-winner's ad find second life on YouTube, who gets the compensation? The original content creator? The brand? The agency? All of the above? Trust me, this will get really complicated, and even if brands us "fine print" to exempt themselves from compensating consumers, original creators will find a way to raise a stink...or create a viral protest.
And this from Streamingmedia.com:
First is the question of how to value content. The simplistic answer is that value is determined by the number of views; a slightly less simplistic answer is that it is determined by the number of advertisement views or even click-throughs. But if the latter two models are used, consumers will at some point argue that YouTube is shortchanging their content by putting lower-ranking (and lower revenue-producing) advertisements side by side with the consumer's content. Besides the quality of ads versus the quality of content—which isn't currently an issue because revenue sharing isn't in full swing—think of the conundrum facing a church group posting an abstinence video that might be generate revenue from people clicking on ads that have as much in common with the church's message as does a global warming warning video with the polar opposite political opponent who might choose to manipulate particular keywords to get his own message across.
