Month: October 2007

Doubleclick’s Data Capture Cookies Reach 100-plus million Net users a Month

We wanted to place this stat on our record. ComScore did a report in June 2007 where it examined [my italics] a “a passive first-party unique identifier cookie for a major Web property (Yahoo!) and a passive third-party unique identifier cookie for a major ad server (DoubleClick). Each cookie is believed to be representative of cookies delivered to the U.S. Internet population and each reaches well in excess of 100 million Internet users per month. These two cookies were selected to maximize reach across the Internet user base to provide as complete a view as possible of consumers’ overall cookie management behavior. The study is based on activity observed within approximately 400,000 home computers during the month of December 2006. This sample was statistically weighted to represent the U.S. home Internet user population along key geo-demographic variables.”

Clearly, Doubleclick gathers tremendous amounts of user data and is considered the standard for testing usage behavior across the Internet platform. Its merging with Google poses serious threats to consumer privacy, whether cookies are crumbled or not.

source: comScore Cookie Deletion Study.

The Hidden Power of Doubleclick’s Databases

Here’s an excerpt from a new trade story. We think it’s relevant to the Google merger review, including the issue of data access and privacy. “excerpt: “Well, it turns out that the “raw” numbers we are using aren’t really raw. They look “raw” to us because 99.99% of the agency people do not have access to (or even want to look at) the raw raw. The raw raw is what the insiders would call log files. They are usually sitting with adservers (DoubleClick, Atlas, etc) and in their databases. Yes, you heard me right. There are databases, humongous ones that collect and compile cookie-level information. And there are database experts, lots of them. We do not see them, because they are not agency people. They work for adservers and sit behind the shields of adserver’s account reps. So in the end we are very much like a database marketing operation, except that in our case database and marketing are siloed in two different organizations.”

from: “The Magic Window.” Chen Wang. Online Metrics Insider. Oct. 12, 2007.

See this short Doubleclick video interview. And think about Google controlling Doubleclick

Take a look at this video featuring Doubleclick’s Rob Victor, Product Manager for Emerging Tech. He discusses the future of mobile and other online marketing issues. One of our favorite lines is: “the challenge facing interactive marketers is getting reliable data from multiple types of media.” [We can imagine who will have such “reliable data” if the FTC permits the merger to go through].

Another excerpt from the interview with Mr. Victor, which gives a glimpse of where it’s all going (not that the industry needs to be reminded. Just the FTC and the public): “At Doubleclick, what we’re doing is creating the opportunity for publishers to sell mobile advertising more reliably. So that means allowing publishers to do ad campaigns which are image banners, combination ads, as well as destination pages for advertisers. But even when they can buy those type of ads, the issue facing them is what happens when you want to start adding an SMS campaign into that, have some sort of call to action–a short code. Buying beyond the standard banner and doing a proper media mix is going to be quite challenging.”

Doubleclick: Self-Proclaimed "Nerve Center of Digital Marketing"

We believe Google is telling reporters and others that the FTC staff have said the merger is approved. Our information is that’s not true at all. If Google is engaging in such a PR campaign, it’s another indication that corporate lobbying goals–not honest debate–is more important to its leadership and culture. Of course, the commission prohibits such information being told to the merger-related parties and the public. Our sources tell us that the staff is only half-way through its review. And that’s before the EC begins what we hope will be an intense analysis of Google’s market position–including the data it will have unfettered access to, if a Doubleclick deal is approved.

But back to Doubleclick. Last Spring, it unveiled a new “brand” identity, declaring itself the “Nerve Center of Digital Marketing.” The company proclaimed that it was “the premier provider of digital advertising technology and services…serving the world’s leading buyers and sellers of digital media.” And just to remind the good folks over at the FTC. Here’s how the company describes itself: “The world’s top marketers, publishers and agencies utilize DoubleClick’s expertise in ad serving, rich media, video, search and affiliate marketing to help them make the most of the digital medium. From its position at the nerve center of digital marketing, DoubleClick provides superior insights and insider knowledge to its customers. Headquartered in New York, and with 17 offices and development hubs and 15 data centers worldwide, the company employs more than 1200 people and delivers billions of digital communications every day. Learn more at www.doubleclick.com.”

loan section company day pay 326401k interest rate loanloan purchase a to 401k homeloan 9 quick paydaycommercial 90 loan constructionloan investor 90loan consolidate bills my a tounsecured secured a or loan Map

When we saw Esther Dyson’s announcement on Huffington Post a few weeks ago proposing a contest encouraging the public to submit videos focused on data-collecting cookies and privacy [for the upcoming November 1 Federal Trade Commission town hall], we raised concerns. Ms. Dyson wrote that she was thinking of having key online marketing industry companies, inc. behavioral targeting firms, sponsor such a contest. In addition, Ms. Dyson herself has a long involvement with the high-tech industry, including a recent deal to appear on a Doubleclick-sponsored promotional video. We liked the idea of the public weighing-in. Just didn’t want the gatekeeper to be Ms. Dyson and online advertising industry-related sponsors.

Ms. Dyson has gotten Harvard’s Berkman Center and its project “Stopbadware.org” to act as the facilitator for the “Cookie Crumble” contest, which now includes a $5000 first prize. Five videos are to be shown during the two-day FTC event. I was told that one reviewer for the video submissions will be someone from Consumer Reports Webwatch. Google is a sponsor of the contest, as is Ms. Dyson’s EDVentures. Google is also a corporate sponsor of Berkman’s Stopbadware effort [we believe academic organizations focused on digital media policy who are funded by the very same companies they should be analyzing on behalf of the broad public, raises academic conflicts of interest]. By the way, we have agreed to be a reviewer of the final videos, after our privacy advocacy colleagues urged us to do so.

But as explained to both Berkman and our colleagues, this Google-supported PR effort is designed to undermine and narrow the growing debate on meaningful privacy protections for commercial digital communications. It’s not just cookies–that’s what the organizers and backers would like people to think. It’s a sophisticated, rapidly evolving, and–frankly disturbing–system with many inter-related components. Google knows that. So, I assume, does Berkman. Cookies are just one of the pieces of an highly-developed commercial data-mining and targeting system that’s designed to influence our behavior. The folks at Berkman should recognize that their reputation–something gained in part from the time when Lawrence Lessig graced their halls–is at stake when they give cover to political efforts favorable to their corporate backers. Hey, Berkman! What about a contest asking users to create videos about what a Google-Doubleclick merger will really mean for privacy and the future of digital media?

movie rental releases newnici sterling moviesnooner movienude me movies ofpretty nude movies soft blondeold movie theatremovie old titlesanderson movie pamela free sex download Map

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

Yahoo! No Competitor for Google (and neither is MSN!)

excerpt from: “Yahoo Worth More Divided Or Sold: Analyst”

YAHOO’S VALUE WILL NOT BE unleashed until it is broken up or sold, Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. analyst Jeffrey Lindsay said in a research report last week. “To stop the inevitable slide into irrelevance, the management team must consider more radical actions and strategies,” Lindsay wrote. “Incremental changes to rebuild revenues simply won’t cut it this time.”…
Yahoo could be broken into ad and subscription businesses to reach his $39-a-share estimate, Lindsay wrote.”

article by Laurie Petersen, executive editor, MediaPost.

movie galleries teen sexmovies sex teeniethe next door the girl moviemovie new redeye thewedding the bride movie princess dressfree movies tiffany towersass and tit movies sexmovies titfucking Map

Reading the Google merger tea leaves in the trade press

Just for the record, here are 3 excerpts from trade articles we believe are relevant to the merger review.

1. “Ad networks given last chance to question Google-DoubleClick deal” [NMA Magazine (UK). 13.09.07]

British ad networks have expressed strong concerns to the EU over the $3.1bn (£1.53bn) Google buyout of ad serving giant DoubleClick. As the deadline for responding to the European Commission’s Directorate on Competition draws near, the industry warned that there would be problems with the merger…Networks have responded to consultation from the Commission about any problems they have with the merger deal, announced in April. This is the last formal way for companies to express their concerns with the merger, although some remain cynical as to whether it will make any difference.

Phil Nott, sales director at Adrevenue, said networks should still send through their objections. “People have accepted this is going through too easily. If they knew they could send in their views and get a chance to block it, then maybe more would speak up about their concerns.”

2. Do Home Pages Have a Place in Web 2.0’s Future? Advertising Age. Oct 1, 2007.

“The report, out today, will serve as a “sanity check” for some early Web 2.0 adopters and technophiles. And, he said, “for more traditional marketers, there’s a whole new world we have to introduce them to.” One of the most surprising things the team found was how many people are starting their online shopping with search — more than 54% of the study’s panel, in fact. The idea that more consumers are coming to brand sites through the side door of search means search engines are starting to circumvent brands when it comes to online shopping. While a consumer looking for a pizza stone offline might drive to her nearest Williams-Sonoma, in the online world she’s more likely to just type the product name into Google and see what comes up.”

3. “Out of the Box: More Than Nine Billion Videos Served.” Brandweek. October 01, 2007
In July, Americans viewed more than 9 billion videos online, according to comScore’s Video Metrix report. Nearly 75% of U.S. Internet users watched an average of three hours of online video during the month.

Google Sites topped the July rankings with the most unique viewers and most videos viewed. Nearly 2.5 billion videos were viewed there (a 27% share of videos)—a full 2.4 billion at YouTube.com. Yahoo! Sites ranked second with 390 million (4.3%), followed by Fox Interactive Media with 298 million (3.3%) and Viacom Digital with 281 million (3.1%).