Audimated.com is a
new social media site for independent musicians and fans; they want to
help artists make more money with their music, and give
fans a financial incentive to promote the artists they
support. What's wrong with this?

For simple, straightforward tasks "if-then" rewards, like financial incentives, work outstanding.  Such would be the case if an artist paid their fans to Tweet a song or post something on their Facebook.  But when the task gets more complicated, when it requires some conceptual, creative thinking—those motivators don't work.

The founding principle behind the work of author Dan Pink says that, "Higher incentives leads to worse performance." Often times, when artists are asking their true fans for help in promoting their music, they need all the conceptual, creative thinking help they can get.  Right? That's what marketing music requires.

If you want compliance, pay your fans. If, instead, you wanted engagement, like most artists do, fans have to be intrinsically motivated. This means fans must have the desire to help direct your career and invest in your music so you can get better and better as an artist, because it matters to them that you do. Most of all, active, engaged fans want to belong to something that's bigger than themselves.

Complacent or engaged fans—your choice. Companies shouldn't pay fans. -kb

Small correction: Audimated.com does not pay fans themselves, but they do facilitate the ability for artists to pay their fans for their promotional efforts.  Either way, I don't agree and think this isn't a good idea. See Dan Pink in action: