Loading...
The true cost of online privacy
Filed under: Technology, Media
Do you like your
privacy? I bet you do. What about being able to read all kinds of
stuff on the internet without having to hand over your credit card
number -- do you like that, too? I bet that's another yes. But
which do you like more? You'd better figure that out quickly,
because, if you don't, Congress just might decide for you.Hoping to avert government regulation, a coalition of advertising and marketing groups today issued a set of guidelines for how its members ought to go about collecting and using information about consumers' online behavior. The guidelines are organized around a Buddhist-sounding list of seven principles, including a commitment to educate consumers about how behavioral advertising works, an embrace of transparency about how data is collected, and a pledge to give consumers more control over how information about them is used.
And that's a problem to anyone who likes the internet more the way it is now: teeming with free, ungated, high-quality content. Online advertising is still far cheaper, on a cost-per-exposures basis, than advertising in other mediums; much of the high-quality content found on the internet now is, in effect, subsidized by other mediums whose business models are themselves threatened by the internet (such as newspapers and broadcast television). If online ad rates don't rise, the universe of available free content is likely to contract considerably. The easiest way to boost the cost of web advertising is to increase its value to advertisers by making it more effective with exactly the kind of behavioral tracking and targeting that Congress is looking to restrict.
You might not relish the idea of some guy who works at Google being able to see what porn sites you visited or how much hemorrhoid cream you purchased last week. But privacy fears are, for the most part, abstract concerns. Measures can be taken to insure that advertisers get the rich data they need even as individuals remain safely anonymous. On the other hand, heavy-handed federal legislation limiting ad targeting will assuredly hit us all in a place we'll feel it: in the wallet.
Huge
gains in Chinese equities markets may make huge risks
After
the death of a salesman, what happens to the ad campaign?
New
York City's real estate slump: A service economy on the
skids
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
7-03-2009 @ 8:52AM
Ablse Johnson said...
There has never been a better time to utilize a good and trusted online privacy service.
RT
www.anonymize.tk
Reply
7-03-2009 @ 9:15AM
Duo said...
You sir are an idiot. Screw companies trying to track what I do on the internet and screw the government for the very same reason. This is exactly why pirate groups exist. If you think that privacy concerns are moot then you will see the backlash from the internet saying the exact opposite and your opinion is NOT in line with the rest of the internet community.
Reply
7-03-2009 @ 11:01AM
BS Buster said...
Rubbish! The advertiser's ability to collect detailed information about website visitors has NOTHING to do with free content. In case you are not above the age of 15, free content on the internet existed BEFORE advertising. Even today, the content exists first and only after a large audience has developed to the advertising vultures show up to replace content with targeted ads.
The internet and free content do not need advertising. However, advertisers and the schmucks like you that try to capitalize on the internet readership would certainly like everyone to believe that rubbish.
The fact is that it should always be opt-in for everything, not just the internet. The opt-out model is so thoroughly disingenuous that it should be criminal. The only reason that it has not yet been criminal is because of powerful lobbyists and politicians on the dole.
It appears that the politicians MIGHT turn that around but, I suspect they are only threatening so as to receive another payout.
Your article is a pathetic attempt at fear mongering.
Reply
7-03-2009 @ 11:01AM
Shane said...
@BS:
Sure there is free content without advertising, ever been to geocities? Now if you want free QUALITY web content, there is going to have to be advertisments.
The question you have to ask is, would I rather have ads about things I may actually care about/want, or not?
Reply
7-03-2009 @ 11:04AM
Andy said...
Content providers need to make money. They can do this either through advertising or by forcing you to pay for access to their content. I'd much rather be hit by relevant ads.
@BS: The content available online prior to mainstream web advertising was minimal compared to what's available now. And yes, advertising swoops in when the audience grows - but only when the content provider warrants it. More traffic = higher costs for the website. These costs need to be covered somehow.
Things change. Deal with it.
Reply
7-03-2009 @ 12:24PM
No2ID said...
You say "But privacy fears are, for the most part, abstract concerns. Measures can be taken to insure that advertisers get the rich data they need even as individuals remain safely anonymous."
Well, let's think back to 2006 when AOL leaked all that user data. If you have enough data, there is no more anonymity and no more privacy. Just ask Thelma Arnold.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AOL_search_data_scandal#Thelma_Arnold
Oh, and by the way, I can't help but notice a distinct lack of ads on Wikipedia... Funny that.
Reply
7-03-2009 @ 12:24PM
poi said...
"If online ad rates don't rise, the universe of available free content is likely to contract considerably"
Ignore this article, complete and total self-serving propaganda. He is owned, and paid for, by advertising interests. The opposite of what he claims has
powered the internet to unprecedented proportions thus far. Free content has and will continue to expand considerably. Surprise! The people who make money off advertising want more advertising, at higher rates. And more tracking, and more control, and more surveillance! Cool, huh?
The remaining vast majority of us should speak in a loud, clear, and unified voice. Now you know what it looks like, call it by name when you see it.
Reply
7-03-2009 @ 12:25PM
Jeff Chester said...
This column has a tremendous conflict of interest--since it's part of one of the largest behavioral targeting companies in the world [via AOL's Platform A/Tacoda: http://www.platform-a.com/advertiser-solutions/audience-targeting/behavioral-targeting/audience-behaviors]
The current system harvests tremendous amounts of information about consumers. As experts have noted, much of what online marketers claim is "anonymous" isn't really so. Responsible marketers should support meaningful privacy policies that will help build consumer trust. We can have both privacy and a robust online marketplace.
Reply