Category: Web 2.0 & Democracy

NYU Legal Ethics Expert Says FTC Chair Majoras should recuse in Google/Doubleclick review

Before we run this legal comment, we want to make something clear. This is about ensuring transparency and accountability in the process. It’s not about political ideology or trying to affect the outcome of a proceeding. There are standards that must be adhered to when one is serving the public (oh, and btw, the idea of disappearing web pages from the Jones Day website reflects, I suggest, their own ethical confusion as well). Here’s an important perspective from today’s Online Media Daily:

“Legal ethics expert Stephen Gillers, a professor at New York University Law School, maintains that there’s no question that Deborah Platt Majoras should recuse herself, regardless of whether Jones Day appeared before the FTC in the matter. John Majoras “stands to gain from the success of Jones Day, especially in a high-profile case like this and, therefore, her decision can affect his interest and therefore her interest,” Gillers said.”

“DoubleClick Law Firm Accused Of Concealing Involvement In Merger.” Wendy Davis. December 14, 2007

about xanax withdrawlsadiction to xanaxxanax htp 5pill xanax 029 id100 30 xanaxdrug xanax methadone test acetaminophenbars xanax amylan a1 xanax Map

Statements on Mark Zuckerberg’s “Thoughts on Beacon” announcement

From: Jeff Chester, Executive Director, Center for Digital Democracy [202-494-7100]

Kathryn C. Montgomery, Ph.D. Professor of Communication, American University. Author of Generation Digital: Politics, Commerce, and Childhood in the Age of the Internet (MIT Press, 2007) [202-885-2680]

Jeff Chester: “Today’s announcement that Facebook users will be able to turn off Beacon, following last week’s opt-in changes, is a step in the right direction. But Mr. Zuckerberg isn’t truly candid with Facebook users. Beacon is just one aspect of a massive data collection and targeting system put in place by Facebook. It’s not really about the company’s desire ‘to build a simple product…lightweight’ that would, as he writes, ‘let people share information across sites with their friends.’ Mr. Zuckerberg’s goal, as he explained on November 6, 2007, was to transform Facebook into ‘a completely new way of advertising online.’ Facebook has rewired its social network to better serve the data collection interests of marketers who, promised Mr. Zuckerberg, are now ‘going to be a part of the conversation’.

“Mr. Zuckerberg can’t simply now do a digital “mea culpa” and hope that Facebook’s disapproving members, privacy advocates, and government regulators will disappear. Nor should Facebook’s brand advertisers permit this statement to diminish the real privacy and security concerns embodied by Facebook’s new targeted ad system. CDD will continue to press U.S. and EU regulators to address Facebook’s significant privacy problem.”

Kathryn Montgomery: “Facebook’s announcement today is a stopgap measure designed to quell the huge public outcry from consumer groups and users over its ill-advised new marketing scheme. The move to allow users to turn Beacon off entirely may restore a small measure of control to Facebook’s members, but it is by no means an adequate safeguard for ensuring privacy protection on this and other social networking platforms. These companies are continuing full steam ahead with new generation of intrusive marketing practices that are based on unprecedented levels of data collection and personal profiling. Regulatory agencies in the U.S. and in Europe need to conduct a thorough investigation of these new forms of social network marketing and develop rules to ensure that consumers are fully protected in the emerging broadband era.”

script action mp3 timepolka mp3 aambeeldsau aaine mp3 kemp3 aazmale aazmaleaao hazoor tumko mp3aassi mp3 helanyocx activex id3 mp3aamer hussain mp3 liaquat Map

EC Enisa Report Underscores Privacy Threats and other Risks from Social Networks: Wake-Up Time for Facebook, MySpace, IAB, FTC, Congress. Rules & Safeguards Required

The expanded targeting based on user profile activity launched last month by both Facebook and MySpace underscore why we must craft federal (and EU) rules to govern the data collection apparatus of social networks. By combining behavioral targeting, transaction data, and profile information, Facebook and others have entered into a new territory. Even industry insiders understand how a line has been crossed: one senior VP at Digitas (part of the Publicis Groupe ad industry empire) noted that [our emphasis]:

“Facebook has made an announcement that has major implications for how marketers can communicate to members going forward. Essentially, Facebook said that it will allow marketers to target members with ads based on its user’s personal profiles, social connections and even the recent activities of each user’s extended network.

This announcement marks a significant departure in the way social networks have been organized to date. Until now, marketers have had limited opportunity to serve ads directly to users within the social network. With this change, marketers will now have the opportunity to target consumers directly based on attitudinal, behavioral and demographic attributes included directly in or inferred from personal profiles and connections online.”

We have sent out to the FTC today this new report [pdf] by ENISA—the European Network and Information Security Agency. Released in October, “Security Issues and Recommendations for Online Social Networks” is worth reading—for its clear and thoughtful analysis and, frankly, its disturbing implications. It’s clear from the start of the paper that social networking sites (SNS) are more than just commercial or personal playgrounds—they are, notes ENISA—“…all-embracing identity management tools…” As the report explains:

“Users are often not aware of the size or nature of the audience accessing their profile data and the sense of intimacy created by being among digital `friends’ often leads to disclosures which are not appropriate to a public forum. Such commercial and social pressures have led to a number of privacy and security risks for SN members.”

Among the “threats” the report lists includes:

1.1 Digital dossier aggregation: profiles on
online SNSs can be downloaded and stored
by third parties, creating a digital dossier of
personal data.
1.2 Secondary data collection: as well as data
knowingly disclosed in a profile, SN
members disclose personal information
using the network itself: e.g. length of
connections, other users’ profiles visited
and messages sent. SNSs provide a central
repository accessible to a single provider.
The high value of SNSs suggests that such
data is being used to considerable financial
gain.
1.3 Face recognition: user-provided digital
images are a very popular part of profiles
on SNSs. The photograph is, in effect, a
binary identifier for the user, enabling
linking across profiles, e.g. a fully identified
Bebo profile and a pseudo-anonymous
dating profile.
1.6 Difficulty of complete account deletion:
users wishing to delete accounts from SNSs
find that it is almost impossible to remove
secondary information linked to their
profile such as public comments on other
profiles.

Among the report’s other recommendations include the need to consider reviewing regulatory safeguards and data protection law, such as the FTC’s Fair Information Practices. Social networks have become a place where people are living out their lives, sharing intimate details about their identity. They cannot be operated as data mining and digital marketing operations solely. They must operate in the public interest as well, including rules protecting privacy for those under 18.

It’s time for a broad range of stakeholders to work together to address what must be done.

PS: ENISA held a conference on the issue last June, featuring a number of interesting papers.

The news media and behavioral targeting connection

It’s long been a concern that so many news organizations–or their parent entities–have embraced behavioral targeting (and so many other types of online marketing techniques) without clear disclosure to users, readers and viewers. There should be stories explaining what’s going on, exposing the techniques used that threaten privacy, analysis on the implications to journalism, editorials supporting reform, etc. We have covered some of these issues in our book and on this blog. But as a reminder, we run an excerpt from a Tacoda want ad for online sales manager: “TACODA®, Inc. (www.tacoda.com) is the world’s largest and most advanced behavioral targeting advertising network… Major US media partners include Dow Jones, The New York Times Company, NBC Universal, … [and] USAToday.com.”

All the news that fit to click, indeed.

The Future of Behavioral Targeting Regulation–First in a [very long] series

Now that the EU’s Article 29 Working Group has announced plans to investigate behavioral targeting as part of its 2008 workplan, advocates and regulators from both sides of the Atlantic can build the case for meaningful safeguards. The goal should be maximum privacy protection. It’s interesting to see the response coming from European-based behavioral targeting firms, such as nugg.ad.ag. In an article for the UK-based imediaconnection trade report, nugg.ad’s co-founder removes the use of IP addresses from the targeters arsenal, writing that “… even IP addresses has no place in targeting.” That will come to a surprise to many in the online marketing industry!

Nugg.ad is engaged in a range of targeting efforts that require the scrutiny of data regulators. But just in case you thought their rejection of IP address targeting made them a worthy of a privacy prize, you would be mistaken. In the same article, the nugg.ad executive describes the new generation of data that can be mined by marketers [our emphasis]: “Web 2.0 offers a better option — user-generated content, be it through word, sound or image, which is fitted with ‘tags’. These community recommendations lift contact management to a new level. By using targeting technology that can be applied flexibly, you can develop completely novel approaches and exploit untapped potential.”

The Article 29 group will surely be working.

8 loan pay day loan paydayprocessor account mortgage loan processor managerstudent loans and achievepersonals site adult loan personalsunsecured credit online secured loan adversestudent loan money aid federal directfinancial student loan aid directgrant loan aid student financial Map

Facebook’s Expanded Ad Targeting: Follow the Algorithm

From Search Insider: “The most striking word that came up repeatedly when I heard someone from Facebook present was “algorithm.” It’s the algorithm that determines how many stories appear in the News Feed, which users members share connections with, and which types of actions are involved. It knows which friends you’re most closely connected to, not just based on how you interact with them, but by factoring in when you and your friends independently interact with the same content. This algorithm might know who your friends are better than you do.”

The evolution of targeting users online (or, "Oh where oh where has our privacy gone")

An excerpt from a recent trade piece that should encourage reflection and concern (our emphasis):

“Today, we can not only target by the sites we think our customers frequent, we can follow them around the Web and target them based upon the other sites they actually visit. We can also target them based upon the words typed into a box, and from where those words are typed through search geo-targeting. We can also retarget searchers elsewhere on the Web. Facebook’s recent announcements take targeting to a whole new level, based upon age, location, interests, and other online activity.”

Source: “Search And Online Advertising: A Continual Evolution.” Ellen Siminoff. Search Insider. November 16, 2007

ringtone 7100i blackberryringtone uesers 100 mtn free tonokia ringtone 6061acdc ringtone mp3free polyphonic 3560 nokia ringtones 100a perfect lie ringtone2006 index mmf ringtoneringtone nextel 24 for i730 Map

ringtone 1260 nokiaringtones 3390 nokiaringtones nokia free 3595free polyphonic ringtone 6600 nokiaverizon absolutely free ringtonesmusic free ringtones no 100 chargeget ringtone know 50 wanna centnokia 3595 ringtone downloadable Map

Google & the Public Interest Policy Pod People

They’re coming. The “Google Policy Fellows” to help staff an array of public interest groups and policy think-tanks. “As lawmakers around the world become more engaged on Internet policy,” says Google, “a robust and intelligent public debate around these issues becomes increasingly important…The Google Policy Fellowship program offers undergraduate, graduate, and law students interested in Internet and technology policy the opportunity to spend the summer contributing to the public dialogue on these issues…Fellows will… work at public interest organizations at the forefront of debates on broadband and access policy, content regulation, copyright and trademark reform, consumer privacy, open government, and more. Participating organizations… include: American Library Association, Cato Institute, Center for Democracy and Technology, Competitive Enterprise Institute, Electronic Frontier Foundation, Internet Education Foundation, Media Access Project, New America Foundation, and Public Knowledge.”

It’s wrong for public interest and consumer organizations to take Google’s money and especially provide a “Fellowship” in its name. We need to build more consumer advocacy capacity to address Google’s growing power, especially its threat to privacy. No matter what these groups say (and some already take money from Google; others receive broad media industry support), there are digital strings attached, as subtle as they may be. The Fellowship program is just another lobbying and PR effort coming from a company that has a broad policy agenda. Many of the groups above should be training people to represent the public versus companies such as Google, and other big online advertisers and new media conglomerates. Giving Google a say on the training of policy advocates, let alone a funding role, undermines the public interest movement.

The image “http://blowyourheadoff.files.wordpress.com/2007/03/invasion-of-the-body-snatchers.jpeg” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors.

EC Second Phase Investigation of Google & DoubleClick: Good for Consumers, Competition and Privacy

Today’s announcement by the Directorate for Competition (DG Comp) underscores that the EC recognizes the serious consequences of the proposed Google takeover of DoubleClick. Competitors, consumer groups, and privacy advocates have provided sufficient information to the commission to warrant this relatively rare phase two inquiry. Google is quickly becoming the key digital gatekeeper for the online publishing and advertising marketplace. At stake here is more than just the skyrocketing Google share price, the convenience of our online searches, or even the current state of online advertising competition. The online marketing system is at the core of the dramatic changes transforming global communications–from broadband PC, to mobile, eventually even to television. If we are to have a more democratic and diverse digital marketplace of ideas and commerce, there must be meaningful competition and consumer protection in the online ad sector. This means Google should be prohibited from buying DoubleClick. Or, that at least meaningful safeguards are imposed that limit Google’s ability to leverage DoubleClick’s vast treasure trove of consumer data and its business relationships with many of the world’s largest companies.

Consumers need to be assured that they won’t be unfairly treated in terms of pricing and choice when buying online; advertisers will need protections to ensure that online marketing remains both affordable and competitive, especially when using Google. Privacy must be considered as well, with appropriate safeguards enacted

Facebook’s chief revenue officer’s pitch to advertisers: We’ve created “the most sophisticated and accurate targeting system available on the web today.”

What companies such as Facebook and MySpace say to their marketing clients and prospects is one thing. To users and members (and regulators), especially about protecting privacy, it’s another story. That’s one reason why we hope everyone will review this video from Facebook’s chief revenue officer Owen Van Natta presentation at a U.K. marketing conference held November 7, 2007. Van Natta explained that the new Facebook marketing system was designed to help marketers reach “people that influence people…the next generation of advertising is going to tap into trusted referrals in a way that has never has been done before.” Using the language of marketers, Van Natta pointed to the 25 million individuals daily on Facebook: “that’s a lot of reach and frequency.” “We’re going to spread your message virally,” he told the Internet Advertising Bureau UK crowd. You can “fan” your brand, he assured them. Facebook would enable them to tap into the “power of the influencer.”

Van Natta also discussed the test they had done of the new Beacon and related Facebook marketing system. Calling Facebook’s advertising approach a form of `social distribution,’ he said that “this is going to create some of the most effective advertising that marketers have ever seen…Facebook social ads are like trusted referrals from your friends.” It’s “the most sophisticated and accurate targeting system available on the web today.” The chief revenue officer also trumpeted the “targeting and insights” capabilities of the new approach: “nothing like this has ever been available before…incredibly power insights…actionable information.”

Van Natta also discussed the benefits for advertisers from the Beacon system, including how the use of the marketed products by Facebook members was tied in to their “mini-feed.” He discussed the new service called “Pulse,” which informs advertisers how many people are talking about their brand on Facebook. That’s “incredibly valuable,” Van Natta noted. He said they knew exactly who was getting the ad, and that advertisers would receive “actionable social data.”

We hope all Facebook users and regulators–here and in the EU especially–will watch this video. Facebook users have no idea they are now part of a viral marketing scheme, where information that is being sent to them is shaped by the kinds of arrangements made with advertisers. The idea that the information shared with marketers is “non-personally identifiable,” as he claims, is absurd. They know your interests, where you live, your circle of friends, etc. There is an important place for commerce in communications. But there need to be rules to ensure that what goes on is fair. And privacy must be protected.