Category: Behavioral Targeting

Google/YouTube/Viacom & Privacy: Everyone tracking our online video use

The stories on a judge’s order for Google to turn-over to Viacom data on YouTube users have largely ignored a key issue: why is Google–and almost every other leading broadband video provider tracking and analyzing our online viewing habits. It’s because–like with broadband generally and with television–the goal is to know exactly what we are viewing in order to better target us with advertising. In the case of broadband video, whether it is YouTube, Hulu, or Joost, for example, it’s about tracking our viewing so well we can be micro-targeted.

Google sees huge profits for YouTube doing this. They now call YouTube a “next-generation advertising platform,” something we think reflects how they really view the service. Google is pitching the branding and sellling of YouTube to advertisers. Google is now tracking YouTube views as it promotes to advertisers a scheme to take advantage of the “viral” marketing capabilities of YouTube. Finally, it’s also useful to consider how Google’s recently acquired DoubleClick also has a product tracking and analyzing broadband video. Users and policymakers should expect their online viewing will be private–and not to be spied upon. Whether by Viacom, the government, or Google itself.

The IAB Can’t Say the Word “Privacy” Before the U.S. Congress

On Wednesday, IAB president Randall Rothenberg testified before a House Small Business subcommittee. Incredibly, the written testimony failed to mention privacy. Nor did the testimony really convey the nature of interactive advertising today. We will be contacting the subcommittee to set the record straight. And the IAB has to do some serious soul-searching. As more people become informed about the data collection and targeting practices underlying digital marketing, they will expect that companies doing business online are engaged in ethical data collection practices. This will be especially true when it comes to protecting the privacy and consumer welfare of children and teens.

PS: This excerpt from Mr. Rothenberg’s testimony is another illustration of how out of touch the IAB has become. They can’t acknowledge the industry’s problems and offer reasonable solutions. The IAB is also going to hurt small business, once customers learn how their privacy is threatened (and how online advertising raises medical and financial data issues, for example). Perhaps someone will come along offering responsible leadership on this issue for small business. They aren’t getting it from the IAB’s lobbying campaign. Once again, no one is saying there shouldn’t be online advertising. But we are saying that privacy has to be protected–where consumers are in charge of what is collected. And that some practices–including data collection and targeting of children and adolescents as well as sectors such as medical information–require safeguards. But the IAB’s leadership has decided to use the “Chicken Little, Our Data Won’t Be Falling” scare tactic.

“A small but vocal coterie of forces opposed generally to marketing, advertising, and open media markets is attempting to advocate to limit the technology responsible for this internet advertising revolution.

Although these advocacy groups have provided no evidence of public harm, their efforts have begun resulting in regulatory proposals which, if enacted, would severely hinder the ability of small publishers to support themselves with advertising sales, and impair the ability of small businesses to use interactive advertising to market themselves.”

Google “Platinum Sponsor” at Ad Research Event

excerpt: “At the Advertising Research Foundation measurement conference… Google’s designs on establishing a leadership position in advertising research were evident… It was the event’s “platinum sponsor,” and the stage, halls and registration area were festooned with Google signage and promotions that made other dominant industry players such as Nielsen Co. look circumspect by comparison…

a Google executive gave a presentation about the capabilities of the TV Ads service–which provides a detailed next-day report on where an ad ran, how many impressions it received, and viewer tune-in levels over the course of a particular spot via second-by-second data.”

ARF Talk: Google Stalks Research Walk, May Balk On Accreditation. David Goetzl. Media Daily News. June 26, 2008

Google expands data targeting and profiling to provide “more brand lift and brand awareness” for ads

Google’s new “Ad Planner” is just one of a series of tools now emerging which are designed to more precisely track and target consumers for advertising campaigns. Microsoft’s “Engagement” initiative has similar roots. “The focus [of Google Ad Planner] is primarily on creating more brand lift and brand awareness [for advertsiers],” [Wayne Lin, business product manager at Google] told DMNews.” Here’s an excerpt from the article:

The tool lets advertisers match demographics and related searches for a particular site, or aggregate statistics for sites in the advertisers’ buying plan.

“This will expose many more sites that are much deeper into the Web,” Lin said. “It opens up data that wasn’t necessary visible before.”

Lin would not elaborate on specifics of how the data is pulled, but said that Google’s wide reach and powerful analytics would provide information on the long tail of the Web.

NebuAd’s CEO Discusses Online Targeting

“The latest in behavioral and contextual advertising technology enable marketers to personalize their messages to consumers by serving hyper-targeted and varied ad formats at every stage of the purchase cycle — ensuring that the right offer is reaching the consumer at the right time. New tools that measure engagement by the degree to which the user is engaged throughout the conversion cycle lets advertisers know what messages work. Rating systems that assign value to each consumer action throughout the funnel give advertisers a more accurate measurement of real engagement.”

Bob Dykes. NebuAd CEO. Imediaconnection. May 28, 2008

Google/Yahoo! Combine also raises questions about Publicis and WPP deals

Officials need to examine the recent deals made both by Google and Yahoo! with advertising agency powerhouses, Publicis and WPP, respectfully. The Google/Yahoo! combine reduces competition in the online ad sector, and these agreements need to be part of the analysis. Google and Publicis completed their deal last January “based on a shared vision of how new technologies can be used to improve advertising.” Last month, Yahoo! and WPP formed a “multi-year strategic partnership” that is connected to the online ad trading Right Media Exchange.

Search should not be considered a “natural monopoly,” as some cynics suggest. Nor should search by viewed as separate from display; increasingly the two are intertwined. Marketers desire cross-platform strategies. Perhaps that’s one reason Google is hiring cross-platform ad specialists. To quote from a Google job posting: “The Cross Platform Solutions team forms partnerships with advertisers and agencies to build brands online. We strive to deliver the most efficient and effective digital platform upon which the world’s leading brands are built. We connect advertiser’s brand messages to their target audience through innovative, precise and accountable online marketing solutions whose reach can extend around the world.”

It’s hard to keep up with the online ad world, so it’s not surprising that regulators have been slow to address the critical consumer and competition issues. But much is at stake in how diverse and consumer-friendly the new media world will become. That’s why the DoJ and the Hill need to look at these ad agency deals, among other issues we will discuss soon.  Btw, privacy is a serious issue in the deal, no matter how Yahoo! may be spinning it.

Trade Analyst on Google/Yahoo!: Google becomes “monopolistic gatekeeper”

From Diane Mermigas June 18, 2008 column in Online Media Daily [excerpt]:

excerpt: The deal puts more than 90% of the search ad market in Google’s hands, and raises the likely prospect that Google and Yahoo will work together on display ads. Executives from both companies have suggested as much, calling the partnership “good for competition;” when they should have said that it is “good for the competition.” The deal is a Trojan horse that makes Google the monopolistic gatekeeper, sucking the democracy and free capitalistic process out of advertising and e-commerce. The nonexclusive clause in the deal seems meaningless…Deutsche Bank, CitiGroup and Merrill Lynch are among investment banks reducing their estimates on Yahoo in anticipation of its advertisers shifting their business to Google. “This effectively signals the end of Yahoo’s competitive entry in the paid search business and signals to advertisers /agency customers to simply work with Google to purchase ad impressions from Yahoo longer term,” said Deutsche Bank analyst Jeetil Patel.

Ad Biz Looks Critically at Google/Yahoo! Pairing

Just some excerpts from today’s coverage, to give policymakers and the public a sense of how the 10 year pact is viewed from inside the ad industry.

First, from Ad Age: “Yahoo is outsourcing search monetization to Google in a 10-year deal, the companies officially announced tonight. But advertisers see less competition and higher prices…But the agreement… doesn’t necessarily protect Yahoo from the possibilities that the deal will erode its search business in the long run or make Google an even more dominant player. When Google search ads are mixed in with Yahoo search ads for a particular search query, Google will almost always win the better placement… And if Google consistently wins, marketers may be less inclined to bother using the Yahoo system, instead choosing to put their optimization efforts toward a single system.”

Yahoo, Google Strike a Deal on Paid Search. Abbey Klaassen. Ad Age. June 12, 2008 [sub required]

Online Media Daily: “…some in the industry have questioned whether Yahoo brass thought about the repercussions of the deal in terms of competition and advertiser perception in the mid- to long-term.

“I think the financial rationale is pretty clear,” said Bryan Wiener, CEO of 360i. “But $450 million is a lot of money, so it can’t just be all tail terms that Google will be serving. I can’t imagine that there won’t be some very valuable commercial terms in that mix.” Wiener said that if advertisers no longer saw the value in buying keywords directly through Yahoo, then fewer companies would end up using (Yahoo’s Search Advertiser Platform) Panama in the long run.

According to Neeraj Kochhar, vice president/director of SMG Search, there are definite concerns among advertisers. “I don’t see this as a positive move in terms of competitive activity,” Kochhar said.”

Final Microsoft Rebuff Sends Yahoo into Google’s Arms. Tameka Kee. Online Media Daily. June 13, 2008 [reg. required]

Stephanie Clifford of the New York Times has a good blog post on advertising industry concerns about the deal.

From the Los Angeles Times, 6/14/08:  “The consolidation of everything under Google is not good,” said Aimee Reker, global director of search at digital agency MRM Worldwide. “It will aggregate so much power and control in one place that it no longer is an open marketplace.”

Tracking You Offline and Now On: Acxiom Database Targeting Products Integrated into ComScore

We are rushing headlong to the seamless integration of consumer tracking and targeting across all “platforms.” We believe the further blending of more traditional “offline” segmentation and targeting tools into the online marketing system raises disturbing privacy and consumer protection issues. Yesterday, Comscore announced that “the addition of Acxiom’s PersonicX segments to the comScore Segment Metrix service for the U.S. market. This powerful new offering is targeted at advertising agencies and marketers seeking higher performing online media plans… PersonicX is a household-level segmentation system developed by Acxiom and used by marketers that groups consumers into 70 different lifestage-based segments based on several demographic variables… Predictive of U.S. consumer behaviors, media preferences, shopping patterns, and financial needs, marketers rely on Acxiom’s PersonicX to target more specific segments in an offline environment than is possible using simple age breaks. comScore Segment Metrix – PersonicX now enables marketers to reach these targeted segments via online as well as offline media, helping marketers better hone their messaging strategy, value proposition, and media placement… said Tim Suther, Acxiom senior vice president for digital marketing services. “The unparalleled insight into the interests of various lifestage interests created as a result of this partnership will allow marketers to generate enhanced planning strategies driven by improved segmentation and better execution by using targeting approaches that accurately align their online and offline marketing efforts.”

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.