• by Wayne Friedman , Staff Writer, April 2, 2009

If viewers are engaged with a TV commercial, their fingers aren't coming near a fast-forward button. That may be enough -- for the time being.

Now that commercial actors have a new contract with advertisers, TV marketers could be seeking better performances for those pay increases. Some form of engagement factor might be necessary.

Advertisers wanted to pay actors as they pay for airing commercials on TV networks, based on viewer ratings performance. Instead, actors will get paid the same as they always have: on a pay-per play-formula basis, no matter whether the commercial production is good, bad, or in between.

Acting can be a risky business for commercials. You need good writers and producers to make good things happen and, as we have learned, it also doesn't hurt to be placed next to a high-rated TV show, like "American Idol," most times, to get good business results.

TiVo recently said marketers need a lot more, endorsing what other TV research has said for years -- viewers need to be "engaged."

But that idea may be too far-reaching. What viewers need is to be "dis-engaged," actually -- stopped from fast-forwarding, or, in an increasingly old-style TV move, going for a different channel.

The problem is, engagement means different things to different marketers. Maybe a viewer will note that "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" will be out soon after seeing a TV commercial or trailer, so he'll make a mental note to go see it. Maybe a Pizza Hut commercial forces viewers to pick up the phone right then and there to order a PANormous Pizza.

No matter. Soon the whole engagement thing will be passé. We'll probably move on to specific brain-wave neuron firings that will show scientific positive or negative results.

Maybe commercial actors will get credit for this activity, and demand even more money. Until then, marketers will ask for a lot more from how their commercials perform. That's just business.