Category: media criticism

Doubleclick at the Brand Summit: Glimpse of Ad-enmeshed editorial future

There was an interesting exchange at a recent imedia Brand Summit event, which you can witness on this video at approximately 7:12 minutes. Chris Young, Doubleclick’s EVP for “Rich Media & Emerging Division” (I kid you not. That’s his job title) asked a question of speaker Sean Finnegan. Finnegan is the CEO of OMG Digital, a new Omnicom global division advancing interactive marketing. Finnegan was touting a viral campaign to drive (literally) young folks from bars directly into `were open all night’ McDonalds. Doubleclick’s Young reflected on the work his company and other major online marketers are doing to create an “embedded relationship, friendship, with the consumer.” He cited the trend among Doubleclick’s clients to develop “long-form webisodic content, creating a series.”

Finnegan’s reply was very telling–and should serve as another wake-up call for all those who care about the further merging of editorial content and advertising. He explained that agencies are “merging the digital groups with the entertainment marketing groups,” expanding what they had been previously doing with such approaches as “plot integration.” Interactive advertising, marketing, big brands, and editorial content all intertwined is the basic business model for much of the new media world. That’s why we should address now–before it’s too late–what the rules, safeguards and alternatives should be.

downloads mp3 99centace how long mp3mp3 pauly adriennemp3 99 problemsvideos adult mp3hadith mp3 40 qudsiabiyoyo mp3 songheart breaky mp3 achy Map

Google Hides Behind Online Content to Protect its Data-Gathering/Targeted Marketing Business

Google’s D.C. public policy lobbyists need to do better than echo the same phrases that advertisers have used for decades. Whenever questions are raised about unethical and consumer harmful business practices, advertising companies–now including Google it appears–trot out the same old canard. Google’s policy people say that we should all be thankful that online advertising has given the public “consumer benefits in the form of more online resources and more relevant information…Simply put, advertising is information, and relevant advertising is information that is useful to consumers.” We are happy to debate the issue about the role online advertising plays in the future of diverse content, especially news. We have real concerns about the gatekeeping role Google and a few others will play as the online content market rapidly evolves. But Google has not answered the basic question, months after its announced takeover of Doubleclick. What privacy advocates are saying is that the way Google conducts its interactive marketing business (especially in the light of the proposed takeover) is a privacy concern–not online advertising itself.

Google CEO Eric Schmidt (see his new Financial Times op-ed) wrote that although Google is concerned about privacy, the solution does not “…automatically mean new laws. In my experience self-regulation often works better than legislation – especially in highly competitive markets where people can easily switch providers.” But, of course, with Google’s dramatic expansion, along with the rush to consolidate (Microsoft, Yahoo! and Time Warner, among others), it’s questionable whether we will have competition. Besides, we require national laws, not self-serving declarations from CEO’s whose business model depends on the collection and expanded use of personal information.

albums mp3 786403 loans bya 7alaly mp3 malitill mp3 937er mp3 jungs203 rehab loans94 mp3 jetta7g bgm mp3 Map

Canadian Privacy Group Raises Key Concerns on Google, Doubleclick and Threat to our Privacy

We urge everyone to read the CIPPIC petition filed yesterday in Canada asking for a investigation of Google and Doubleclick. Among the key questions raised is whether the two companies are violating Canadian privacy law (Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act-PIPEDA). The full document is on the Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic website. But here are some key excerpts raising very important issues. Bravo! (and Merci) CIPPIC.

“37. Google’s servers automatically record information when the user visits Google’s website or uses Google products. Google server logs record the search request, URL, Internet Protocol (IP) address, browser type and language, and the date and time of the request, and one or more cookies that may uniquely identify the user’s browser. Google stores server logs indefinitely, but “anonymizes” them after 18 months.

38. The act of collecting user search queries and IP addresses invokes PIPEDA, requiring Google to provide adequate notice to users of any collection, retention, use, or disclosure of personal information other than that which can be reasonably implied (in this case, collection, retention and use necessary to deliver search results to the individual user). Without such notice, Google cannot be said to be obtaining meaningful consent from users to any other information practices, including retention and use for targeted marketing purposes.

39. The fact that Google’s search service is entirely dependent upon targeted marketing to users is not evident to the ordinary computer user. It cannot therefore be said that users implicitly consent to the use of their data for marketing purposes, even if such use is central to Google’s business model. Indeed, most users likely do not reasonably expect Google to retain their search queries in connection to their IP address for much longer than necessary to deliver the requested search results.

62. Google collects a variety of personal information about its users and uses that information to, among other things, improve its target marketing services. Online advertising services are constantly being improved, sometimes in ways that involve greater collection and use of personal data. This raises the question of what level of data collection and analysis is necessary for the purpose of target marketing; at what point is Google collecting more personal data than necessary for advertising purposes? No doubt Google is limiting its collection of data to that which is relevant for the marketing purposes, but the test in Canada is necessity, not relevance.

63. CIPPIC submits that a determination of what is necessary under Principle 4.4 should be driven not by what is possible or desirable from an advertising perspective, but rather what is actually necessary for Google to provide the service. The same test should be applied to all online advertisers, not just Google.”

clips nude movieof free movies lesbiansmovies asian pornfree movies porn longspears sex britney movieporn trailers movie samplemovies black porn freefuck dog movies Map

Google’s Mobile Search Advertising Ambition: Control the Market

From Online Media Daily [“Google’s Mobile Ad Move Gets Everybody Talking.” Tameka Lee. September 14, 2007] excerpt:

The search giant “is acting fast to take control of the mobile search ad market–a crucial move if it expands as predicted,” said Silicon Alley Insider’s Dan Frommer. And with The Kelsey Group predicting mobile search to generate more than $1.4 billion in ad revenue by 2012, Google is trying to get a jump on what right now is anyone’s game.

Google had been testing mobile text ads since last year, but decided to expand the effort–informing all AdWords advertisers through emails that if they didn’t opt-out, their sponsored links would now be served to mobile searchers…

According to a Google spokesperson, the company went full-scale with mobile search ads, partly because of the sheer volume of mobile-ready ads in place, and because “the mobile space is an increasingly important part of how users are accessing information.

Google: Cash, not Quality, Redefines Top Paid Search Placement

As Google changes its policies so it can dramatically broaden its reach for advertisers, esp. the ones with the deepest marketing pockets, it’s key to understand what it means for the future of democratically distributed content. We believe Google’s recent change to its “top rank” formula for paid search ads is important to note. One day, “quality” can be a parameter is helping define what sites show up first; the next, as it works to generate greater revenues, it’s who can pay the most. Here are key excerpts from a two-part story on ClickZ: [my italics] “The change is to the formula used to calculate whether Google gives the advertiser (and specifically, the ad) top placement. Top slots are defined as the slots above the organic results, as opposed to ads shown down the right rail…What changed is the formula Google uses to decide whether to show your ad in the top portion of the page or leave it in the right rail. To have an ad considered for top placement, you need a minimum Quality Score…Assuming you have a sufficiently high Quality Score, the new formula uses a combination of maximum bid and Quality Score to determine eligibility subject to a new minimum price for top placement set by Google.

This allows Google to decide, on a keyword-by-keyword and SERP-by-SERP basis, how much it wants to earn for the top spots. The minimum bid price for top positions is undisclosed and subject to change.” [blog note: SERP is the search engine results page]

The search function has become an important part of democratic media. Keeping the leading search engine accountable and transparent—let alone ensuring competition and meaningful access for diverse information—is key. All of the major search engines, btw, inc. Yahoo! and MSN, require serious public interest scrutiny.

Google and Yahoo! Among Largest Donors of Ad Council

In a full-page ad in today’s New York Times “Week in Review” section, the Ad Council lists its `who’s who’ of media and big brand donors. Atop its list is the “President’s Circle,” those select few who donated $150k and up. Google and Yahoo! joined Johnson & Johnson, PepsiCo, Time Warner and the board and staff of the Ad Council itself in that select donor category. In comparison, CBS, Coca-Cola and Microsoft was listed below in the Council’s “Leadership Circle,” donating anywhere from $100K-149K [“Bronze Class” donors, the lowest category of those giving between $1K and $4,999 included media companies Bonneville International, Media General, and the Hallmark Channel].

Google also serves on the Ad Council’s board of directors, working alongside many of the global heavyweights in marketing and media, including Publicis, McDonald’s, DDB Worldwide, and the New York Times. Despite its rhetoric as an organization dedicated to public service, the Ad Council is really part of the marketing industries political support system. While there are many in the ad business who sincerely do care about the public interest, the Council isn’t ultimately about supporting real change. Certainly nothing which would seriously challenge the role marketing and advertising plays in contributing to inequities in our global culture.

mp3 speakers 256mbprice 2best levitracdma qualcomm 3g ringtone64kbps mp3 informationcredit adjudicate opm issuessouthern mp3 403 crosslevitra 171 b b 119law colorado gambling 1972 Map

Knight Foundation and a Grant for Viacom’s MTV: Funding a giant on its Journalism advisory committee

We have long had concerns about foundations funding media conglomerates to provide public service content. So, the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation’s recent award of $700,000 to MTV was troubling for us. The grant, part of Knight’s News Challenge awards, was so MTV can create “a Knight Mobile Youth Journalist (Knight “MyJos”) in each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia to report weekly – on cell phones, and other media – on key issues including the environment, 2008 presidential election and sexual health.” Viacom’s 2006 revenues were $11.5 billion. Don’t you think there’s enough left over to pay for the mobile journalism program! The idea that MTV should be subsidized for contributing to public service is wrong-headed. Besides, MTV is engaged in such mobile activities to help build up its brand so it can earn more online advertising dollars.

Journalism foundations such as Knight–and J-Schools–should be holding the media industry’s editorial feet to the fire, shaming them to spend more money on serious journalism. Knight should not be funding media conglomerates whose owner resides comfortably in Beverly Hills. Meanwhile, it what raises some interesting questions about “insider funding,” we note that Viacom’s MTV VP Ian Rowe serves on the Knight Foundation advisory committe for journalism. Rowe is quoted in the Knight Foundation press release announcing its News Challenge grants as a grantee spokesperson.

PS: What timing. Broadcasting & Cable just reported that Knight is again teaming with Viacom’s MTV to give away $500,000 to support “young people who have ideas for pushing journalism into the digital age.” It’s called the “Young Creators Award.” We hope all the money has come from Viacom. By the way, Knight and media beat reporters should be asking what MTV is doing with the data it can collect from mobile users. Will it engage in targeting for its other products? In what ways are the Knight supported work designed to build up the commercial role of MTV? How much is such pro-social ad campaigns worth to Viacom’s bottom-line?

Yahoo! Swallows Blue Lithium to Expand its Behavioral Targeting Effort

The ever-growing consolidation of control in the online ad market continues (something CDD and USPIRG warned the FTC about in Nov. 2006). Yesterday, Yahoo! acquired ad network and behavioral targeting firm Blue Lithium. The deal is part of the spate of $30b or so mergers [Ad Age. sub. may be required] and acquisitions in the ad marketplace we’ve witnessed just in the first half of 2007. There have been major deals by Google [Doubleclick], Microsoft [aQuantive], Time Warner’s AOL [Third Screen Media, Tacoda], WPP [24/7] and Yahoo! itself (RightMedia]. These deals are a major threat to privacy. Here’s what Yahoo!’s Jerry Yang said in announcing the deal:

“This acquisition will extend our ability to deliver powerful data analytics, advanced targeting and innovative media buying strategies to our customers, who are increasingly looking for these insights. By leveraging BlueLithium’s complementary expertise and tools, we will be able to better address the needs of our performance-based display advertisers and enhance the value of our publishers’ inventory.”

Blue Lithium adds to Yahoo!’s BT data-collecting and targeting arsenal ( it recently launched the perversely termed “smart ads” effort). It’s newly acquired online ad exchange–RightMedia–also offers behavioral targeting. There is a tremendous explosion going on in terms of data collection, profiling, etc. from online marketers. It’s not–as Yahoo! lamely claims–about seeing an ad for Las Vegas instead of Paris if you want to get married in Nevada. It’s about commercial surveillance and the manipulation of the public.

PS: Paidcontent.org pointed out this comment on Yahoo!s corporate blog, which shows you their partners and reach:
“By acquiring BlueLithium, we’ll be accelerating our advertiser, product, and engineering roadmaps and will be in position to better compete in the burgeoning performance marketing arena.

This is the logical next step as we build what we believe will be one of the world’s leading online display ad networks, which includes inventory on Yahoo!’s owned and operated properties, our affiliate network (our partnerships with eBay, Comcast, and our consortium of nearly 400 newspapers), the Yahoo! Publisher Network, and the Right Media Exchange.”

Stat on Blue Lithium via DM News:  “According to comScore Media Metrix, BlueLithium is the fifth largest ad network in the United States and second largest in the UK with 145 million unique visitors each month.”

a7la zahra mp340hz mp3 grondtonenmp3 kassai gabriella dr 8amp3 aamir khan98se recognize mp3mp3 monsters real aaahhaaja mp3 aajaoyster godzilla blue cult mp3 1977 Map

For Sale on Ebay: Your Online Privacy

eBay is working with behavioral targeting technologies, including a test “retargeting” users (that means electronically shadowing) as they visit AOL, MSN, clients of Yahoo’s RightMedia ad exchange and other sites (eBay has contracted with AOL’s Tacoda subsidiary, a behavioral targeting specialist). According to Behavioral Insider, eBay is using “a member’s on-site history to target relevant ads by its many Power Sellers.” As the publication explains, “[T]he world’s biggest online auction house knows a lot about its users’ bidding, browsing and buying habits, and now eBay is leveraging this knowledge in behavioral ad targeting both on and off the site.”

How is eBay tracking users? Here’s what Kasey Chappelle, director of eBay’s marketplace division, told the Insider: “Some of the things we are doing off-eBay involve retargeting where you are traveling to a site after being to eBay and we place an eBay ad there that is going to change depending on what you have done in the past on an eBay site.” eBay’s Scott Shipman explained that the kind of data used to track and target you includes… “category type of data, bidding data, the types of items you may be bidding on or browsing on within the eBay system… What we know about are items you are bidding and browsing and listing and selling in certain categories, so we can pass that information into a profile. When you are out on the Internet and are about to see an eBay ad we can associate that affinity with the ad.”

This, of course, raises serious personal privacy concerns. But while eBay is proclaiming that it’s protecting your privacy—it’s not really in our opinion. That’s because Ebay’s new so-called “AdChoice” privacy scheme is an opt-out service. According to the news report, one can “opt-out” of the system if eBay customers click on various links that then send them “directly to a page that lets then [sic] state a preference whether they want their eBay data used to target that ad to them.”

Here’s how eBay’s Shipman, who serves as its senior counsel, global privacy practice, explains it: “The eBay page explains the AdChoice program, that we care about your information and how you are targeted and marketed to. And if you would prefer that we don’t use your information to target ads to you, you can tell us that you would prefer a generic ad and not have ads targeted to you. And you opt out immediately.”

We placed a call to Mr. Shipman early yesterday, seeking an explanation of the opt-out scheme. But he did not return the call as of this posting.

eBay has been one of the leading companies promoting network neutrality–an open Internet. Protecting privacy is a key component of such an open and democratically-run online medium. Privacy shouldn’t be for sale–even on eBay.

licking movies cuntanal sex movies deepdeep-throat moviesvidcaps did or in movies or bdsmmovies disney porngirl licking dog moviesmovie double analfree download movies xxx length full Map