Category: elections & Internet

Why We Require Rules Regulating Political Ads Online

We have long been calling for rules regulating political online and digital advertising. Beyond the privacy concerns, which are enormous, we fear that the same big-money driven politics will be played out online. The time to impose “free time” and campaign limits for digital political advertising is now (along with rules governing data collection and profiling). Here’s a quote about a new study on search and politics [our emphasis]

“With no restrictions on how much an individual or political action committee can spend buying search terms, and no record of who is buying the ads, the candidate with the most sound search strategy could end up swaying the remaining undecided voters and winning the 2008 election,” stated Kevin Lee, CEO and co-founder of Didit.”

Big money, I suggest, will change the way the Internet (and other digital media, inc. mobile web) as we know it operate.   We should be addressing this issue now, before–like our current corrupt system–it becomes a inextricable part our political culture.

Behavioral Targeting and Political Campaigns: The tip of the Online Targeting Iceberg

We hope readers will review the excellent articles on behavioral targeting and the election that appear in Businessweek [“The Candidates are Monitoring Your Mouse”] and The Washington Post [“Candidates’Websites Get to Know the Voters”].

Most observers understand that there are serious privacy issues involved when anyone–be it a marketer and (especially) a politician engages in data collection and micro-targeting online without prior consumer/citizen consent. While a few might express sentiments of cynicism–claiming that because some lawmakers may use these techniques it’s unlikely they will support safeguards–the opposite is true. Responsible lawmakers will recognize that in a digital democracy, protecting everyone’s privacy is crucial. Just as the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, which I helped spearhead, received strong bi-partisan support (Sen. John McCain was a co-sponsor, along with Rep. Ed Markey, for example), so will new rules which protect everyone online. Responsible parties will support meaningful safeguards–or be on the wrong side of much consumer ire.

PS: NPR has a fascinating and a very revealing video interview on this topic with Michael Bassik, Vice President for Interactive Marketing at MSHC Partners. MSHC represents the Democratic National Committee, Moveon.org, and the Center for American Progress, among many others. Here’s an especially informative excerpt [my transcription]:

“…in the past we were able to determine whether an advertisement was delivered, and we call those advertising impressions; we were able to determine how many people clicked on an ad, which is called the click-thru rate, and we could figure out from there the cost-per-click. That was about the extent of the reporting we had in the past. But now in 2008 we have tremendous deep reporting capabilities. So I can tell you, for example, who saw a John McCain banner ad on which site. And which placement on that site and which size the ad was. I can tell you how long that ad was on the page for before someone click on it. I can tell you if they clicked on it whether they donated, whether they signed –up. But also tell you whether someone saw that ad, but did not click on it. But two weeks later went to John McCain’s website on their own and made a donation. We can tie that donation back to the fact that they saw an ad on CNN.com three weeks prior in the political section in the 728 by 90 leaderboard size. I used McCain as an example, but of course all the candidates, including our Democratic and progressive candidates, are doing that.”

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.”

Yahoo! wants politicians to use Behavioral Targeting to target voters–Privacy and voter manipulation ethics ignored

Yahoo! is urging elected political officials and campaigns to use the arsenal of online advertising tools, despite the questions such dubious techniques raise on privacy and other consumer protection issues. Here’s an excerpt from a Yahoo! VP for political ads piece urging pols to embrace behavioral targeting. From Politics magazine online:

“Use the Internet as a more efficient, less expensive channel to reach voters with certainty… political campaigns are about seven years behind the private sector in their use of the Internet as a paid media vehicle…campaigns can make the web work harder for them by using online display media…Our studies indicate that a targeted ad based on geography or demographics can increase response rates by 50 percent. And when ads are targeted based on behavior, those rates increase to 66 percent. These are campaigns based on certainty-whereby a specific audience is messaged to and managed to produce a desired result. This is true whether it’s a campaign to acquire donations or e-mail addresses, or a persuasion or get-out-the-vote message. Moreover, the results can be seen in just hours or days, letting you keep doing what works and kill what doesn’t…the real opportunity is to use the Internet as a paid media platform to run, track and move persuasion metrics.”

Here’s Your Real Online Advantage … And No, It’s Not Viral Videos. Richard J. Kosinski. Politics. 4/1/08

ringtones ladyboy access mexico monophonic connectmonth loans 6017 hertz ringtonea is loan what 7 chatteladsense ringtone adwareringtone james 007 bond24h mp3 chronoringtones 02 x2 Map

Online marketers want to track you–from click to click to “last ad” click

Microsoft and Google, along with many partners, are working to perfect a consumer tracking and analysis system so they can better figure out who gets to share in the growing online ad revenue pie. It’s called “engagement mapping.” Although if you are concerned about privacy, you might want to say, “let’s call the whole thing off.” Here’s an excerpt from the April 14, 2008 Ad Age article:

“The concept appears simple, but the technology is complex: raw log-file data, time-stamped and collected by ad-serving companies like Google’s DoubleClick and Microsoft’s Atlas, along with a short line of code known as a pixel hidden in web pages, keep a record of each time consumers enter or exit a web page, click on a link or ad and enter information in a search box or application. Those data are fed into software platforms designed by companies such as Atlas, Epic Advertising, Media Contacts and Starcom.

“It’s sort of like reading an advertising diary,” said Ben Winkler, VP-interactive media director at New York-based Ingenuity Media Group, which joined Atlas’ project earlier this year. “It’s like you opened a diary where someone wrote, ‘I saw three billboards, I heard a radio ad, saw a few banners ads, and searched through Google to find and buy the product.’ “

Rather than wait for a crisis to tell the advertising client something isn’t working, media buyers can rely on these data to identify when consumers had contact with the ads, even if it’s an hour, day or week later.

“We know the person saw ad No. 4 on Yahoo Finance an hour ago,” said David L. Smith, CEO at Mediasmith, which is participating in Atlas’ and DoubleClick’s tests with advertisers. “Embedded code in the pixels lets us track the pages and things they interact with on the site.”

source: New metrics give `credit where due.’ Laurie Sullivan. Ad Age. April 14, 2008 [sub may be required]

Google as “media company” & favoring its own sites–a report from a search engine trade show

John Battelle was on a panel at the recent Search Engine Strategies (SES) conference in New York. Here’s an excerpt from his blog post–which I hope you will read in full [our emphasis]: Google’s brand promise – to be neutral, to be above monetary interest – is in conflict with, well, the rest of Google’s brand promise, to be a superstar stock, to grow faster than any company in the history of the world. And all of that is in conflict with …. Google’s brand promise, to get consumers to the best answer, fastest, regardless of who owns the content. Because…sometimes, that content is now owned by Google…Why when you search for stocks does Google Finance come first? Let’s be honest here. It’s not because some neutral algorithm chose Google Finance. It’s because Google owns that data. Google’s representative admitted as much on our panel today. And, given that, can one reasonably ask why, according to Comscore’s data, the preponderance of results that come up in Google’s universal search are YouTube? Might it be because they are they best results? Sure. Might it also be because Google owns YouTube, which is madly trying to monetize the second, third, and fourth click with new models that it hopes to heck are going to pay off?

Consider this a form of `let’s help Google try and be more honest about privacy and data collection’ public service.

Excerpt from PC World:
“Google’s YouTube will soon give marketers more data about viewership of its videos, so that they have a better understanding of clips’ reach and effectiveness at boosting brand awareness and sales.

The online video site plans to make more granular metrics available in this year’s second and third quarters, including data about the usage of YouTube videos that are embedded in external sites, said Brian Cusack, YouTube sales team manager.

“YouTube has enormous amounts of data, but not great reporting on that data yet,” Cusack said during a keynote speech at the eRetailer Summit….YouTube…is building models to distinguish content that is universally interesting from content that is locally interesting, in order to make that useful for its advertising customers, Cusack said.

YouTube to Improve Usage Metrics: New data about Google’s YouTube video viewership will be availabletp marketers. Juan Carlos Perez. IDG News. March 3, 2008

berkasih mp3 adattho forever mp3 abcredit teacher abilene150 tramadol free shippingringtone adon olam30gb mp3 cheapadolescent gambling problemimage admin link manipula tramadol order Map

IAB’s new “Privacy Principles”=A Failure to Protect Consumer Privacy

The IAB has embraced a `circle the data collection and micro-targeting digital wagon’s’ with its new privacy principles. Instead of embracing a policy that truly protects consumer privacy, IAB members are trying to hide behind the same failed approach they have led to governmental inquiries in the US and the EU. The IAB should have adopted rules so that no data can be collected without full disclosure and prior consent of the consumer, as well as other fair information collection principles. The IAB’s proposed new PR campaign to promote the role of interactive marketing will undoubtedly by slick–but won’t be honest. That’s why my CDD will keep telling the FTC, the EU and the public about what really goes on with data collection and digital marketing. These slightly refurbished fox-watching-the-data-hen-house-privacy principles won’t provide any substantive protections for consumers. The failure of the IAB to acknowledge key issues related to sensitive data–including children, teens, financial (think subprime mortgage-related) and health–is a glaring failure of the group’s ability to do what is required to protect consumer privacy.

The IAB is trying to help its members dodge the digital privacy data bullet. But privacy advocates and officials concerned about consumer welfare in the digital age will eventually force the needed changes. What’s sad is that instead of playing a leadership role in the privacy debate, the IAB is attempting to stick with the past. Don’t they realize that change is coming?

Microsoft’s quest for Yahoo!—Follow (Your!) Data…or Hi, Ho, Hi, Ho, it’s off to harvest your data we go

We will be covering the proposed takeover, from both the online advertising business and privacy side. Here’s a revealing tidbit from BusinessWeek on what Microsoft hopes to achieve from a deal: “What’s more, the company is hoping to bring together Yahoo’s research and development staff, who’ve done innovative work in online advertising auction theory and data-mining, with its own online lab.”

Yes, a key to analyzing this deal–if it happens–is what are the consequences when Microsoft’s adCenter merges with Yahoo!’s Panama and other data mining assets. That’s why it’s important to keep a spotlight on what Google and Microsoft, among others, plan to do. Here’s an example of where we are headed, courtesy of Microsoft’s adLab demonstration this week [via Clickz]: “Online advertising has been centered around keywords for too long,” said Tarek Najm, an engineer for Microsoft’s advertising and business intelligence systems, adding the “next wave of advertising is going to use new algorithms and technologies” that display ads based on consumer intent.”

The Net’s “Long-Tail”–a Leash Controlled by Two Giants & FTC Bungles Merger Review

Just a few added thoughts on the proposed Microsoft-Yahoo! deal. We think there needs to be real soul-searching by Congress and the FTC on how it addressed the Google/DoubleClick deal and the related spate of new media mergers in 2007. We told both Hill leaders and the FTC that they needed to explore the larger dimensions of this deal–including its impact on the diversity of online publishing (that’s because whomever controls the “monetization” engine of the online ad biz becomes the critical controller). When Microsoft, Yahoo!, Time Warner and the others went on a post GoogleClick shopping spree, we said the FTC should reject these mergers until they had examined the entire online ad market. But the commission failed to do so, in our opinion.

So now as a proposed Yahoo! takeover by Microsoft is considered, one serious concern is that a merger brings with it newly acquired assets that further add to concerns over consolidation and data privacy. The FTC approved without safeguards the $6 billion takeover of aQuantive by Microsoft. The FTC approved without safeguards the takeover by Yahoo! of behavioral targeting ad network Blue Lithium. The FTC approved without safeguards Yahoo!s acquisition of online ad exchange (and data collection system) known as Right Media. There have been other purchases as well by the two companies.

Congress will need to investigate the implications to both competition and consumer privacy: neither the FTC nor DoJ can be trusted to address these concerns. There are also human right issues, given Microsoft’s own work in China. We will be following this deal closely, including examining the implications of a Yahoo!-Microsoft digital combine.