What are you looking at?
A thought just occurred to me while was reading about User Centric’s latest eye tracking research on Google vs. Bing. They discovered that the 3-column design on Bing means more people look at the ads on the right. (They also found that most users ignored the “flyouts” that happen when you hover over a result at Bing.com – I hate those flyouts so hopefully Bing can be persuaded to drop them…).
I’m right in the middle of reading a lot of diverse stuff on human attention and vision, to try and get some insight into why people respond to visual cues online. But just this simple analysis of eye movement on Google/Bing did make me think: Why not charge advertisers for looking?
This may not be as valid for text ads as it is for banner ads (which are often more about branding and awareness). As an advertiser, currently an impression is an impression is an impression. But I can see a situation where charges are based on how many people look at an ad, and for how long. Obviously as a publisher you’d then want to optimise your site so that the maximum number of people look at an ad – which would be a much more subtle (and algorithm-driven) process…
