IAB’s Lobbying Against Privacy Safeguards: Trade Group Will Add New Members to Help Fight Consumer Protection Legislation

The trade lobbying group Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) plans to add new members to help it generate “grassroots support against proposed legislation in New York and Connecticut that would ban the collection of data about online consumers without a person’s specific consent.” According to ClickZ, the IAB will create a new low-dues membership structure which will enable smaller online advertisers to swell its ranks. What is IAB’s pitch to its prospective members about privacy safeguards offered by state legislators in New York and Connecticut? ClickZ says that “[T]he IAB contends that the proposed measures would have a disproportionate negative impact on small publishers that rely on ad networks to manage advertising sales.”

The IAB’s leadership is off on a irresponsible mission to persuade online marketers and the public that privacy rules would “kill the web.” Such an self-serving view of why privacy rules are required in the age of online marketing will only further diminish the credibility of the IAB.

ATT: DoJ, EC and Congress: Yahoo!’s own claims should raise alarms about a Google or Microsoft deal

No one should sit by and let either Google or Microsoft carve-up or take-over Yahoo! without a serious examination of the competition, privacy, and other consumer protection issues. This week, Yahoo! ran a four-page ad inserted in Advertising Age. Here’s some of Yahoo!’s own copy for regulators and the public to ponder:

“Yahoo! delivers the largest audience in the U.S.-the most 18-34 year olds, the most 35-54 year olds, the most women….Today, Yahoo! reaches over half the world’s Internet users. And with our growing network of premium publishing partners, including over 625 leading newspapers, we’re working with the other half…Our insights and understanding of our users lead to smarter targeting, so we can connect the right audience with the most relevant message–yours…With more ways to connect to your customers more deeply than ever, the future is wide open.”

From Yahoo! Advertising Age insertion. June 2. 2008 entitled: “What Happens When You Can Connect To More Than 550 million People From Over 170 countries Who Spend 2 Billion Hours Each Month In One Place?”

Google Opens its Network to 3rd Party Ad Servers, but Fails to Candidly Address the Privacy Issues

Google announced Tuesday that it [our emphasis] “is accepting third-party advertising tags on the Google content network in North America. This will empower advertisers to work with approved third parties to serve and track display ads, including rich media ads, across the Google content network through AdWords, giving them more options, flexibility and control over their campaigns.” Among the companies it lists that can track us through the Google network includes its own DoubleClick, as well as Eyeblaster, Eyewonder, Pointroll, Unicast, Dynamic Logic, and Interpolls.

Google has created a three-part video series on YouTube to “explain” how ad serving works. But like so much of Google’s privacy PR, it doesn’t really explain what the goals are of its expanded ad service. It also attempts to minimize the very real privacy concerns. Google uses its online ad industry Orwellian-like Doublespeak to suggest that the profiling and targeting of users is “enhancing their web experience.” Google could have included in its YouTube script what it is telling prospective YouTube ad sales persons: “that Google technology enables the world’s biggest advertisers to enjoy immediate and accountable communication with the consumer…to drive revenue… to top-tier brand advertisers and agencies…[via]… a next-generation advertising platform.” It could have said that its expanded online ad platform was designed, as its job announcement for a New York-based “Google Financial Services Account Executive” states, to help “the biggest financial services companies in the world. This includes investment, credit card, tax, banking and insurance companies.” Or as it explains in its “Google entertainment account executive” job announcement, “you’ll help to provide integrated, cross-platform advertising solutions for media and entertainment clients including TV, movie, gaming, music and web publishing companies.”

Google’s blog announcement for the opening up of its network to 3rd party ad servers, and its three-part series, could have detailed the range of data being collected and tracked by its DoubleClick and now other companies. That would include DoubleClick’s “Rich Media’s Audience Interaction Metrics package,” which “lets you analyze data on more than 100 unique interactions in every creative unit including multiple exit links, counters, timers and video metrics.” Or Eyeblaster’s “advanced …powerful tracking and optimization capabilities” that examine “unique viewer behavior– why look at impressions and clicks when you can look at the behavior of individual customers.” Or Unicast’s “User Engagement Index (UEI), that measures a user’s interaction with a rich media ad and provides a score made up of key engagement metrics.” Or what its now 3rd party approved from Eyewonder collects, such as “track all video interactions, rich media interactions, brand interactions and time, and …Custom tracking… to also measure metrics critical to your specific campaign.”

Google really requires both a privacy and online marketing ombudsman, to say the least. They have a very hard time being straight-forward about what information about us is being collected, how it’s really used, etc. Perhaps independent observers and consumer advocates whose mission is to help the company be more honest with itself, its employees, and its users would help. Meanwhile, we will just have to help regulators, policymakers, and the public better understand what Google isn’t really telling us.

PS: This announcement also has implications for mobile privacy. We think this quote from Mobile Marketer is very telling (hey, Google. Put him on your GoogTube channel!): “As mobile advertising evolves and matures, advertisers will demand consistent, in-depth analytics and immersive consumer engagement frameworks,” Mr. Rahav said [Amit Rahav, VP, Marketing, Eyeblaster]. “…To be able to retain client confidence and quality of user experience, Google defined a process for certifying trusted partners like Eyeblaster and other companies. Defining such rules of engagement creates the win-win ecosystem that helped scale Web advertising and stands to do the same for the mobile world.”

PPS: Perhaps Google should have addressed this, from its new 3rd Party approved partner Interpolls: “Interpolls is the only rich media company providing a complete end-to-end suite of integrated marketing solutions. In addition to rich media advertising, Interpolls provides clients with interactive promotions, live on-air voting, site polling, online sweepstakes and more. All of Interpolls services can be integrated into its proprietary platform, offering customers tremendous convenience while maximizing reach, awareness and results. “Expanding our distribution network to include the Google content network was a critical piece needed to provide our clients with the industry’s largest rich media distribution to reach their customers and prospects without limitations,” said Peter Kim, CEO and president, Interpolls. “The agreement opens the door for our clients to increase their distribution through the Google content network, and provides Google publishers and advertisers access to our innovative rich media advertising and widget solutions.”

PPPS (and we promise this is the last one!). Google also announced that several research firms were now allowed to work with its network and, we assume, help “measure performance” of Internet ads. They include Dynamic Logic, IAG Research, InsightExpress, and FactorTG. For example, IAG (now owned by Nielsen) says it “is the only panel-based measurement service that provides continuous evaluation of Internet ad performance and a direct comparison to TV ad effectiveness.” In another words, to help grow Google’s ad business it has, understandably, opened up its service to the network of tracking, analysis, and interactive media delivery services which comprise the world of marketing. But, we believe, Google should have explained all this clearly to users, and not–in our view–gloss over what this all means.

IAB’s Response to Calls for Consumer Privacy Rules: Hire More Lobbyists to Protect the “Wild West” of Data Collection & Ad Targeting

Granted, the IAB’s Washington, D.C. lobbying shop, opened last year, is a small operation. Now the IAB is in the process of hiring a second person for the office. No doubt IAB wants to protect the data collection and micro-targeting digital turf of its members. Former Tacoda and Time Warner exec. Dave Morgan perhaps revealed why the political stakes are so high for IAB members such as Google, AT&T, Comcast, Time Warner, Disney, CBS, NY Times, Washington Post, etc. in Media Post. As Morgan explained, “.. Everybody now knows that data is the fuel for growth. Everyone is starting to mine it and make it available to third parties…The big four (Google, Microsoft, Yahoo and AOL’s Platform A) are all opening up their networks and systems to leverage third-party data; so are the ad servers like WPP’s 24/7 Real Media; and so are the ad networks…We’re moving into a wild, wild west in monetizing real-time marketing data, and we’re going to need many more people that know how to do this…As we see this data take on more value and play a bigger role in our industry, the public policy implications are going to become much more pronounced.”

Senator Dorgan: remember the role of digitally targeted ads & FTC in subprime mortgage scandal

Last November, my CDD and USPIRG filed an amended complaint with the FTC asking it to crack down on behavioral targeting, including its role in the subprime mortgage lending crisis. We are glad Senator Dorgan and others raised concerns that the FTC is failing to do its job in this critical area. Online mortgage lending–and related financial matters–requires serious consumer safeguards. Online marketers–including search engines and social networks–have looked the other way while a great tragedy has befallen so many in the country. We are urging Senator Dorgan to examine the CDD/PIRG complaint, and help get the FTC and other regulators on the case.

U Penn Prof. Joseph Turow responds to the

Randall Rothenberg of the Interactive Advertising Bureau lobbying group wrote a commentary where he made a number of misleading statements. He incorrectly characterized the work of Professor Joseph Turow. Prof. Turow, a leading academic expert of the online marketing industry, is on the faculty of the Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania. Here is Professor Turow’s response:

In one sentence, Mr Rothenberg manages to make two fundamental misrepresentations. What I really say on page 2 of my 2006 book Niche Envy (where the quote originates) explicitly relates to marketers use of surveillance technologies without consumers understanding: “Over the long haul, however, this intersection of large selling organizations and new surveillance technologies seems sure to encourage a particularly corrosive form of personal and social tension.” Nor do I anywhere lament the passage of the three network universe. For example, I explicitly state in Breaking Up (on page 199, for example) that three network era had its own forms of social exclusions and state that “that “the proper response to this hypersegmentation of America is not to urge a return to the mass-market world of the 1960s and 1970s.” My conclusion: when I see Mr Rothenberg quote someone I will be sure to check the source to make sure the passage has not been wrenched from its context. I should add, too, that I accept the need that digital interactive media have for target marketing and database marketing. But there are many creative ways to meld data analytics and their implementation with openness and public engagement. I fear that Mr Rothenberg”s policies and writings indicate he will lead this important organization in directions that are misguided for marketers and for society.

free porn blowjobporn blowjob picturesvideos porn blowjobclips porn blowjobsblowjobs porn picsporn blowup dollblu cantrell days pornblu-ray pornography Map

Former journalist and now online ad industry lobbyist Randall Rothenberg, in a BusinessWeek commentary, suggests that the call for privacy rules ensuring individuals have control over their data will undermine the Internet. You would think a Madison Ave. trade group could craft more creative PR copy. But the online ad industry’s position is indefensible, since they built a system based on the harvesting of our information without believing they would need to get our permission first. The IAB board should realize it has embarked on a very dangerous campaign here that will undermine credibility for many marketers. Here’s my response submitted to BusinessWeek:
Mr. Rothenberg, as head of the interactive ad trade group lobbying against the call from consumer groups for the government to protect personal privacy online, fails to address the central question regarding online advertising. The call for regulation is designed to ensure individuals control their data while on the Internet or using their mobile phones—not companies such as Google, Microsoft, and AOL. Public interest groups are not opposed to interactive marketing: indeed, we recognize it as a key source of funds for online publishing. But Mr. Rothenberg’s members have created a commercial surveillance system that rivals the NSA—tracking and analyzing our every move while on the Internet, all so we can be encouraged to behave favorably to some marketing message. Responsible ad industry leaders will seriously address the privacy threats created by the interactive marketing apparatus—and not hide behind self-serving claims that unless our privacy is lost, we won’t have a robust digital medium.

credit accept paymen cardprogram accreditedcredit american collectionscredit accpet cards3 credit addresses reportdays 4 credits 3 incredit testing reform a-123account credit card merchant allinanchor Map

Google, Comcast, Verizon, AT&T and Time Warner in coalition to fight state-based public interest and consumer protection issues

Scratch a media conglomerate–old or new–and you reveal a political agenda that is all about the aggrandizement of power–consumer and data privacy be damned. Here’s are excerpts from a Kate Kaye story on the roll-out of the state-based coalition designed to protect the interests of the online advertising industry.

From California to Utah to New York, state legislators regularly propose laws with major implications for the online ad industry. A once-loose collective of companies including Google, Yahoo, AOL and eBay finally incorporated officially this year after four years of collaborating to influence state policy.

The most recent target of the State Privacy and Security Coalition’s efforts is New York Assemblyman Richard Brodsky, sponsor of a bill preventing third parties from using sensitive personally identifiable information for behavioral ad targeting.

The coalition doesn’t like it. A missive sent to the legislator April 7 by the coalition’s lead counsel calls the bill “unnecessary,” and “most likely unconstitutional.”…Jim Halpert, partner in the communications, e-commerce and privacy practice at law firm DLA Piper, penned that letter. As head counsel for the coalition, he also recently facilitated its incorporation.

“There’s much more state activity than federal activity,” said Halpert. Not only does that create more laws or proposed laws to deal with; the state process moves much faster.

According to Halpert, the coalition also includes Verizon, AT&T, Comcast, and organizations such as the Internet Alliance and tech trade association AeA, formerly the American Electronics Association. With Halpert at the helm, coalition members conduct weekly phone calls, and sometimes meet in-person with other members or with state lawmakers to influence legislation involving online privacy and data security, Internet advertising, online child safety, content liability, spam, spyware, and taxation…

“We see the coalition’s role as helping state legislatures understand the technology policy area. I think we all recognize the technology environment can be complicated,” said Adam Kovacevich, Google’s senior manager, global communications and public affairs. Google Director of State Public Policy John Burchett is the firm’s primary liaison to the coalition.”

source: Google, AOL and others make state policy coalition official. Kate Kaye. clickz.com. April 14, 2008

CDD and USPIRG File Comments on

Although not yet on the FTC website, CDD/USPIRG filed comments in the proceeding. They are available here. Our submission makes clear the commission must immediately enact policies to protect consumers and the public, especially to protect their health/medical, financial and family information. It provides, I hope, a very good overview and rich detail on the latest digital marketing developments that threaten privacy and consumer autonomy.

With european privacy regulators also now looking into behavioral targeting and interactive marketing, there is growing awareness on both sides of the Atlantic about these powerful privacy threats. Hold on IAB, wherever you are, it’s going to be a bumpy ride!

gambling merchant p account credit cardand for address gamble proctorpathological linked abilify gambling tomcilwain gamble aaroncoupons 30 protor gamble 12gambling day cruise 1350 court texas gamble districtfarm ohio gamble payment 2006 steve Map

Bravo for New York Assemblyman Richard Brodsky and his Privacy Bill Protecting Consumers Online

New York State Assemblyman Richard Brodsky understands that the digital marketing industry–aided and abetted by too many complicit online publishers–have created a system unfair to consumers. Our data is continually harvested as we are monitored online (and soon via cell phones and even TV). Ad servers take our information about the pages we visit, the shopping carts we use or abandon, the search terms we use (think health, mortgages, etc.), the videos we watch or click off–and much more–so we can be profiled, tracked across the Web, targeted, and then confronted with a variety of marketing messages all designed to have us change our behaviors (to like this product or that, feel someway about a brand, engage in a purchase, or a relationship–including giving up even more personal info). Our data becomes the key part of what the online ad industry calls a “Marketing & Media Ecosystem.” But if we don’t have serious privacy and consumer protections, this “ecosystem” will erode our privacy, consumer rights, and help undermine the role of the Internet as a democratic medium of discourse.

The lobbyists at the Interactive Advertising Bureau (whose board includes Google, Microsoft, Yahoo!, the New York Times, Comcast, AT&T, News Corp/Fox) make the spurious claim that Brodsky’s bill (and similar privacy proposals) threaten the Internet–because, they argue, such safeguards would reduce the advertising that supports much of online content. That is absurd. No one is saying there can’t be advertising–we are just saying it needs to be done ethically. The public requires a digital media system that empowers the individual. Let each person decide what kind of data can be collected and how it can be used (after carefully–but concisely– explaining the consequences of micro-targeting). There should be real limits on how long the data can be retained as well.

The real “ecology” for the future of online communications is a healthy balance between commercial and ad supported ventures and a vibrant public sphere. The IAB is relying on tired lobbyist phrasebook warnings about threats to the Internet if advertising has to abide by consumer protection rules. Frankly, we are amazed that the IAB–with its membership representing most of the major online publishers–can’t adopt a more statesperson-like approach.

Mr. Brodsky’s bill needs to be strengthened, so consumers are empowered to decide what data can be collected, via an opt-in system. It must also protect New York residents from the egregious data collection excesses that we have witnessed with the online mortgage and financial sector, and the emerging health information field. So Bravo to Assemblyman Brodsky for his leadership role in helping protect consumers from a digital marketplace that has evolved based on the unfair and deceptive system of interactive data collection.