Online Ad Business Hopes a Logo Will Fend Off Feds, Privacy Problems

If the Web ad business really wanted to put an end to its simmering privacy problem, it could do so with one step: Make behavioral advertising opt-in only.

Which means it would allow publishers, advertisers and their proxies to watch what you do on the Web, and serve ads to you based on your behavior, only with your explicit consent.

But the Web ad business insists that an opt-in solution is no solution at all and would stop the industry in its tracks. So a coalition of publishers and ad networks, including Google, Yahoo and AOL–everyone, really–is trying out gambits like this logo:

The technical name for this is the “Advertising Option Icon.” It’s supposed to let you know that you’re seeing ads served up through behavioral tracking. And that clicking on the image will tell you more and give you a link to a “Consumer Opt-Out Page, where consumers will be able to easily opt-out of some or all participating companies’ online behavioral ads, if they choose.”

Translation: Hey Washington! No need to step in and regulate us! We’re doing it all on our own!

It’s theoretically possible that the average consumer, who is already trained to ignore most online advertising to begin with, figures out what the logo means. But it’s not very likely.

And it’s even less likely that this one is going to satisfy privacy advocates and/or politicians who pay attention to them.

Next?

Anonymous

I’m not sure what is the purpose of NewsCorp’s scare campaign against online ads, ads pay for the internet (among few growth industries), and most of the rhetoric is FUD really.
Also the irony of having the gov’t defend privacy is brilliant.
http://rendion.myopenid.com/ render

Selling the cookie data on the backend and aggregating it is illegal. Cookies are the least of your problems. Say hello to the prosecutor. You will not escape him.
http://twitter.com/michaelkbaker Mike Baker

Peter
This is a pretty cynical take on an important industry initiative A point of view can make writing more interesting, but I think journalists also have a duty to write in a balanced manner. I think we have more than enough angry, disparaging blog posts littering the “digital revolution” and not enough quality journalism.
Anonymous

Peter, one of the big problems with “opt-in” is that all the benefit of such a program will accrue to the top 25 web properties (Google, Yahoo, AOL, Facebook, etc.) because they are the only ones with enough clout to require (and receive) opt-in consent from their users. This would further polarize the online ad industry, give the largest web sites ALL the leverage when it comes to controlling these opt-in lists, and ultimately kill all the innovation and competition that comes from LOTS of smaller companies that won’t be able to put forward their own opt-in processes. And that’s to say nothing of the consumer experience, which would be horrific — you’d now be asked to opt-in to almost everything you encounter across the web and you’d start seeing multi-vendor opt-in processes — ultimately rendering the opt-in check box even more useless than today’s opt-out check box. I honestly cannot imagine anything worse for our industry. I like innovation and competition — so let’s find a better way to keep the industry thriving. I don’t pretend to know the right answer, but I don’t think it would be good for anyone (other than perhaps the top 25) to mandate “opt-in”.
http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/ PKafka

What about a global opt-in – the equivalent of a Web passport that tells sites “go ahead and track me, under the following conditions”? Visitors with the passport would get targeted ads, and perhaps they could have access to more premium content that those ads support…
Anonymous

Peter is correct–what’s required is disclosure, user control, and opt-in. The new icon-based program fails to really inform consumers about the process. The debate has also already moved beyond self-regulation–after more than a decade of promises. Responsible industry leaders should work with consumer and privacy groups to enact sensible safeguards–and not follow trade lobbying groups that want to keep a status quo model that will weaken the online marketing business. This issue is only going to become more charged, as the public learns how their most sensitive data are being unfairly collected and used.
Anonymous

News Flash: Journalism is Dead
Frederik

The advertising option icon looks too much like the BBC’s iPlayer logo. That might be confusing.

Online Ad Business Hopes a Logo Will Fend Off Feds, Privacy Problems

comments so far. Add yours.

AllThingsD by Writer