Category: Uncategorized

Congressional Internet Caucus–Brought to You by Google, Microsoft, Verizon, AT&T, CTIA and More!

We hope the era of government reform that should be a hallmark of the incoming Obama Administration and the new Congress will include reforming the Congressional Internet Caucus.

For too long, the Caucus agenda has been under the influence of the “Advisory Committee to the Congressional Internet Caucus.”  This is not an independent group–but one with connections deep into the Silicon Valley and communications business.  Last week’s annual State of the ‘Net Congressional Caucus meeting was funded by “platinum sponsors” Google, Microsoft, and Verizon.  The “gold sponsors” were AT&T,  the Center for Democracy and Technology (which is funded by many of these same corporations), CTIA (The Wireless Association), and VeriSign.  “Notepads” were provided by the Hunton & Williams law firm; “Laynards” were paid for by Juniper Networks.  “Coffee Breaks” paid for by the National Cable and Telecommunications Association.  Qwest provided “bags.”  The Venable law firm gave out the “travel coffee mugs.’

As always, the agenda of the meeting was purposefully narrow, to help ensure none of the corporate sponsors would be seriously challenged. Broadband policy is too important an issue to be left in the hands of a few well-funded DC insiders.

The Interactive Advertising Bureau’s Official Definition of Behavioral Targeting

As the debate on privacy, consumer protection, and online marketing is renewed, it may be useful to see how the interactive ad industry classifies its practices.  Here is the definition of behavioral targeting from the IAB’s own glossary of terms.  My bold:
“Behavioral Targeting-
A technique used by online publishers and advertisers to increase the effectiveness of their campaigns. Behavioral targeting uses information collected on an individual’s web browsing behavior such as the pages they have visited or the searches they have made to select which advertisements to be displayed to that individual. Practitioners believe this helps them deliver their online advertisements to the users who are most likely to be influenced by them.”

Here are a few other terms used by the IAB that illustrate some of the the online ad industry’s data collection and targeting process:

“Click-stream –
1) the electronic path a user takes while navigating from site to site, and from page to page within a site; 2) a comprehensive body of data describing the sequence of activity between a user’s browser and any other Internet resource, such as a Web site or third party ad server.
Heuristic –
a way to measure a user’s unique identity. This measure uses deduction or inference based on a rule or algorithm which is valid for that server. For example, the combination of IP address and user agent can be used to identify a user in some cases. If a server receives a new request from the same client within 30 minutes, it is inferred that a new request comes from the same user and the time since the last page request was spent viewing the last page. Also referred to as an inference.

Profiling –
the practice of tracking information about consumers’ interests by monitoring their movements online. This can be done without using any personal information, but simply by analyzing the content, URL’s, and other information about a user’s browsing path/click-stream.
Unique user –
unique individual or browser which has either accessed a site (see unique visitor) or which has been served unique content and/or ads such as e-mail, newsletters, interstitials and pop-under ads. Unique users can be identified by user registration or cookies. Reported unique users should filter out bots. See iab.net for ad campaign measurement guidelines
Web beacon –
a line of code which is used by a Web site or third party ad server to track a user’s activity, such as a registration or conversion. A Web beacon is often invisible because it is only 1 x 1 pixel in size with no color. Also known as Web bug, 1 by 1 GIF, invisible GIF and tracker GIF.

FTC Revolving Door: From Director of Consumer Protection to Law firm Partner at “the premier provider of legal services to technology, life sciences”

Lydia Parnes has been the director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection at the FTC.  Think about where we are today in consumer protection–and the many problems we face.  Consider the role of the FTC on financial issues [the subprime market] to online privacy to youth obesity.  And then look at this January 13, 2009 press release from “Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, the premier provider of legal services to technology, life sciences, and growth enterprises worldwide.”  Excerpt:

“…announced that Lydia Parnes will join the firm as a new partner in March. The current director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection (BCP) at the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), Parnes is a highly regarded expert in the field of consumer protection, particularly in the areas of privacy, data security, Internet advertising, and general advertising and marketing practices. She will be based in the firm’s Washington, D.C., office.

“The global regulatory climate has grown more stringent and complex, and we have seen an increasing need for expanded expertise on consumer-protection issues from our clients, especially those in the technology and digital media sectors,” said CEO John Roos. “As one of the country’s foremost consumer-protection officials, Lydia brings unparalleled experience to the firm’s regulatory practice when it comes to privacy, security, and other consumer concerns.”

We don’t believe government officials should immediately work for industry in the areas they regulated after leading the government.  They should pursue careers in academia or non-profit organizations, if possible.  As long as there is a revolving door of this sort, doubts about the ability of the FTC to protect consumers will continue.

Google Supports Greater “Micro-targeting” of Ads on its Content Network

Google is working with online ad company Tumri to facilitate greater ad targeting.  According to Behavioral Insider [excerpt]:
“What we’re doing with Google is that for the first time they’re opening up the interface on their contextual network. So as an ad is being served they pass us keyword information and we adjust the ad subcomponents in real time, based on the context of the page the reader is looking at on a keyword level. Examining the contextual information and marrying that with past search and behavioral patterns, elevates the level of targeting.

… With Tumri, Google is opening their interface and architecture to allow Tumri to access keywords for pages. When an ad is served, the Google content network will pass through Tumri with recommendation of content, and Tumri will refine that further.”

In Tumri’s January 6, 2009 release announcing the Google deal, it noted that:  “Tumri’s participation in context-aware ads on the Google content network benefits advertisers by allowing Google to feed its contextual page information about web page content into Tumri’s dynamic ad generation engine. Tumri’s AdPod seamlessly generates highly-targeted marketing messages in real time through its dynamic, intelligent ad optimization and presentation layer based upon the advanced contextual information from Google…

The Tumri solution – the AdPod – enables advertisers to craft highly targeted marketing messages to consumers on-the-fly. The Tumri platform seamlessly deconstructs ad creatives into core sub-components, then enables advertisers to adjust each sub-component by targeting parameters or optimize by performance metrics… Tumri’s patent-pending platform optimizes performance at a sub-ad component level and delivers unparalleled consumer insights through its proprietary reporting.”

Google, YouTube, and DoubleClick Cookies Placed on Users of YouTube’s new Congress Channels, Says Computer Scientist

Columbia U computer professor Steven M. Bellovin has an important post on the privacy issues raised by YouTube’s new House and Senate channels.  He writes [excerpt, our emphasis] that:

“I opened a fresh web browser, with no cookies stored, and went directly to the House site. Just from that page, I ended up with cookies from YouTube, Google, and DoubleClick, another Google subsidiary. Why should Google know which members of Congress I’m interested in? Do they plan to correlate political viewing preferences with, say, searches I do on guns, hybrid cars, religion, privacy, etc.?

The incoming executive branch has made the same mistake: President-Elect Obama’s videos on Change.gov are also hosted on (among others) YouTube. Nor does the privacy policy say anything at all about 3rd-party cookies.”

Video channels providing the public access to members of Congress and the new Administration should be in the forefront of privacy protection-and not serve as a data collection shill for any company.  Nor should one company be permitted to shape broadband video access to federal officials.

Google Lobbying: Why Congress Should Not Use the new YouTube Senate and House Video Hubs

Google is taking a lobbying tactic developed in part by CSPAN years ago–offer members of Congress a free service so they can be seen by the public.  That kind of electronic or digital campaign contribution helps insure that Congress will think twice about biting (or regulating) the video hand that feeds.  Google’s new YouTube Senate and House Hub channels raise a number of concerns and policy questions.

For example, what happens to the user data as people click on the Congressional YouTube channels?  Does Google get to collect, analyze and use such data for its growing political online advertising business?  Beyond privacy, should Congress be endorsing a private for-profit venture as the principal access point voters and constituents need to use?  Does the use of YouTube create a potential conflict of interest for members of Congress who will need to regulate Google–on such things as competition (the DoJ recently described Google as a monopoly); privacy, consumer protection, etc (remember, Google sells all kinds of ads for mortgages, credit cards, junk food, health remedies, etc.).

It’s not a coincidence perhaps that Google’s YouTube congressional channel announcement comes at the same time the company is expanding its online ad business for politics.  As Ad Age reports this week,“The end of an election season usually means dismantling the campaign apparatus until the next cycle. But not at Google; not this year…Rather than packing it all away until 2010, it’s hoping to build a year-round political-advertising business one House seat and hot-button issue at a time.  “There are 500,000 elected officials in the U.S. With the advances we’ve made in geo-targeting, we think this will be part of every political campaign in the country, as well as issue campaigns,” said Peter Greenberger, Google’s director of election and issue advocacy…Google doesn’t yet offer targeting based on congressional districts, but with ZIP code and city targeting, politicians and advocacy groups can cobble together a reasonable approximation of a congressional district.”

The in-coming Obama Administration has had the support of Google’s CEO, and company officials have played a role in the transition.  But the new administration should develop a digital outreach approach to the public which is public–and non-commercial–in nature.  It shouldn’t show any favoritism, even if Google is the leading search and video service.  It should be a change.org--not a government via dot com.

see: “Election  is Over, but Google Still Chasing Political Spending.”  Michael Learmonth.  Advertising Age.  January 12, 2009.

Ad agency has “profiled more than one-third of the world’s online population”

Developments in advertising, data collection, consumer analysis and targeting must be transparent and accountable to the public.  In a profile of Havas Digital, OMMA Magazine notes that [our emphasis]:

“Havas has created a dynamic online ad trading system that separates audiences from publishing content, and it makes user profile and unique cookie data king, rather than the inventory a publisher serves.  The core of Havas Digital’s virtual brand network is its Artemis database management and reporting system, which has already profiled more than one-third of the world’s online population. That and the agency’s Adnetik system help deliver customized roi analytics for media buying.”  “Artemis is the central piece of our media buying offering,” Kasper [Adam Kaspar, a senior VP] says. “Its importance has only grown as the technology has improved.”Coupled with proprietary algorithms, that database has allowed the agency to develop systems that draw on data from third parties, including clients, publishers and networks, that helps it understand which audiences command the most value at a particular time for specific brands.”

Artemis is a “marketing data warehouse.”  Yahoo is using the service, including for its already data-enabled Right Media Exchange.  Havas describes Artemis as “our proprietary marketing decision support system – a secure warehouse for all your marketing data, plus reporting tools that help make sense of it all.  Unlike some of the less sophisticated reports advertisers may receive from ad-servers, for instance, Artemis® provides detailed reporting right down to the user level.”

The FTC, EU, Congress and others will need to need to investigate the growing role consumer data plays in targeting us on and offline.  We don’t need private ministries of information tracking the global public.

Dr. Mark Cooper’s Vision of a Principled Broadband and Telecommunications Policy Stimulus Approach

In a recent essay on reforming the Federal Communications Commission, long-time consumer advocate and economic expert Dr. Mark Cooper concludes with a very important analysis.  He says that:

“Ensure that stimulus does not deteriorate into corporate welfare, as the financial bailout did. A progressive stimulus package should direct funding to the distinguishing features of 21st century infrastructure – human capital and social networks.  Human capital and social networks are the unique inputs of the digital economy that create collaborative production.  These can be supported by directing funds to people and communities, rather than corporations.”   

Dr. Cooper is correct.  If the digital media era is to truly help the public, then funds should empower communities.  That includes social networks, mobile platforms, video services and other content services that foster a diverse and more democratic communications environment.  If the broadband part of the stimulus plan is merely corporate welfare to the already unregulated powerful, it will not generate the kind of economic growth–or societal change–envisioned by the incoming Obama Adminsitration.

Google Helps Sell Pizza for Papa John’s, Pizza Hut, and Domino’s

Google does many important things.  But it’s an ad company, including helping these three companies build their direct selling online.  Here’s an excerpt from the trade publication QSR:

“We’ve been working with the big three pizza companies over the last three to four years to develop online ordering, and it has become a significant sales engine for them,” says Sam Sebastian, director of local and business-to-business markets at search engine giant Google. “It’s such a competitive space.”

Online ordering typically accounts for anywhere from five to 20 percent of a national pizza chain’s business, Sebastian says. To entice customers to use their service over that of the competition, chains are turning to online search advertising, banner and click-through ads placed on Web sites, and social media sites such as YouTube, Facebook, and MySpace.

So far, online search advertising, whereby a company buys ad space that will appear when a user types a keyword or phrase (“New York City pizza”, for example) into a search engine, has made up the largest portion of media spending online.

…”It’s a direct connection, direct response,” Sebastian says….

Web sites across Google’s content network partner with the company to syndicate advertisements, and Google works with individual web sites and companies to broker advertising.

“If I know my customers are on … any web site where in the content there is a discussion about pizza, I can place my advertising there so it’s available contextually,” Sebastian says.

Papa John’s recently launched its first foray into advertising on the Google Content Network with a one-day blitz of display ads on various sites including MySpace, and restaurant and menu guide site MenuPages.com.

The flash display ads promoted an offer of one free medium cheese pizza with any online pizza purchase for customers who signed up to receive e-mail offers…

Broadband Stimulus Investment or Broadband Corporate Welfare?: The Information Technology and Innovation Foundation’s new report

Yesterday’s New York Times had a column on broadband innovation and a potential federal investment as part of the forthcoming stimulus proposal.  The article cites a new report by the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF) calling for a “$30 billion” investment in “the nation’s digital infrastructure.”  The ITIF report, “The Digital Road to Recovery: A Stimulus Plan to Create Jobs, Boost Productivity and Revitalize America,” is to be released Wednesday.  Yesterday’s article didn’t mention the special interest relationship ITIF’s backers have with such a proposed broadband “bailout.”  We haven’t seen the report yet (ITIF says it will be available Wednesday).  But we hope it explains how the major digital media companies and lobbyists which help govern the ITIF will likely benefit from such federal funding.

For example, ITIF’s board includes representatives of IBM, Cisco, Oracle, Microsoft, and Sun Microsystems.  The ITIF itself is an affiliate of the Information technology Industry Council, which says it’s “the tech industry’s most effective lobbying organization in Washington.” The council’s members include, among many others, Time Warner, Dell, Corning, and eBay.

Pork–whether for building bridges to nowhere or of the digital variety–doesn’t belong in a stimulus package.  Broadband investment is important.  But the public deserves full disclosure about who may benefit from the use of federal funds.