Behaviorial Advertising Definitely At Risk-You’re Stalking ME?
By EditorWe suspect that targeted/behavioral advertising is going to be a very, very hot topic in the coming months. The recently published study and analysis of a survey done under the auspices of the Annenberg School for Communication and the Berkeley Center for Law and Technology is a shocker, and a wake-up call to business. Read on, especially if you are a marketer.The study has uncovered some surprising American public reaction when people learn how tracking/targeting works, and how persistent their data is in the hands of marketers. Some 63% thought that a website with a privacy policy was obligated to delete your browsing data when you exit the site. It is not so obligated unless its policy says it will do so.
70% felt that companies should be fined substantial amounts if they bought or sold personal data illegally, and that individual executives should be prosecuted.
Americans frankly don’t like being watched and “stalked”, especially if they are not told it is happening. even by merchants who, in my experience, quite sincerely believe they are doing a service to consumers by presenting offers to them tailored to their interests, especially for younger people. And I acknowledge there are the “not-so-scrupulous” and the basically criminal.
But, 86% of the young adults surveyed said they did not want tailored ads if they were based on tracking them through their online browsing and used data from more than the site they are on when advertised to. In short, guessing what to give me from what I’ve done in your online store is ok, but also using what I did next door is definitely not on.
Let’s be clear. Neither the study nor this blog entry is a rant about targeted advertising. The study uncovers some fundamental public concern about what is for most people a new aspect of the Internet. Those concerns have to be addressed and allayed. There has to be conversation among policy-makers/consumers/marketers that at the end of the day reaches consensus on what is “civilized” in the American context. I for one am inspired and enthused listening to marketing experts in this field, like David Scholes, talk about engaging customers on several different levels and using data responsibly, energetically and creatively to serve both buyers and sellers. The last thing they want to do is alienate anyone.
The coming discussion may not be easy, but it has to be done. The discussion has to be informed about the technology and marketers will have to stop doing some stuff they love to do. Any profession with new toys wants to use them to their full advantage and generally sincerely believes it’s in the public’s interest to let them. But the public has rights that need honoring and concerns that need to be heard.
Ever hear about a “flash cookie”? Look it up. Persistent little bugger. Won’t go away. That’s going to be outlawed, we think. Look for our review of the study in the next issue of The Prescott Report. The study is available here : http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1478214
It would seem that consumers are skeptical, or perhaps afraid, of how they are tracked and for what purposes. Through the unfortunate activities of some unscrupulous marketers, everyone has gotten a bad name. Understandably so. After all, who wants to opt in to a program only to be inundated with calls, emails, direct mails, etc., as a result. It has happened to me. I am not a proponent of “opt out” programs. Too nefarious. I have not problem with “opt in”. People like to make their own choices and generally do not like having their choices made for them by someone who they don’t even know.
Once again, our desire for profitability (or better, the desire of some who put profit ahead of ethics) puts the whole industry under an unfortunate spotlight.
Ethics questions are complicated. Sam`s Club is reporterd to be using targetted pricing based on its database of past purchases. If you ask the people who are enjoying extra discounts on the things they want, I doubt that they would trade these discounts for more privacy. But should the data have been collected in ther first place?
That’s where an informed debate ought to take place.