republican-creole
Search:  

 
 
   News
newer
story category Shocker: Informed Consumers Want Privacy, Not Tailored Ads
92% support a law requiring companies to delete your info on request
10:02AM Wednesday Sep 30 2009 by Karl Bode
tags: legal · business · privacy · consumers
Most consumers are completely clueless about their online privacy. For example, ISPs have quietly been selling your browsing data without your consent for years without anybody bothering to notice. Even during the recent stink over behavioral advertising -- which most consumers also know nothing about -- people remained oblivious to clickstream sales. Your data sold entirely without your consent or knowledge. No problem?

As with most things, a consumer's tendency to be annoyed is directly proportional to how informed they are. Not too surprisingly, a new study from the Universities of Pennsylvania and California, Berkeley finds that once consumers are educated on the width and depth of today's online privacy practices, they overwhelmingly oppose this kind of tracking. From the new survey, one of the first done via the phone by someone other than a corporation:
Contrary to what many marketers claim, most adult Americans (66%) do not want marketers to tailor advertisements to their interests. Moreover, when Americans are informed of three common ways that marketers gather data about people in order to tailor ads, even higher percentages -- between 73% and 86%--say they would not want such advertising.
Of course this deflates the claims of ISPs and marketers, who continually insist that consumers are just itching for the kind of tailored advertising provided by tracking your online usage. Worse perhaps for carriers is the study's finding that the vast majority of consumers support a slate of new privacy laws -- including laws that would force ISPs and marketers to delete consumer info if requested, laws that would give consumers the right to know everything a website knows about them, and laws requiring immediate deletion of web browsing activity.

As usual carriers, marketers and lobbyists are way out ahead of this belated privacy awakening by consumers and legislators, given it could cost them billions. Companies have been working overtime in DC trying to convince lawmakers than privacy laws aren't necessary because the industry can police itself for wrong doing. Verizon, for instance, insists that no consumer privacy protections are necessary because public shame will keep Verizon honest.

Consumers -- at least the informed ones -- apparently think otherwise.

Related:
  1. Google Starts Using Behavioral Ads
  2. Wednesday Evening Links
  3. NSA Still 'Overcollecting' American Data
  4. NebuAD Officially Closes
  5. BitBlinder: Like TOR, But Faster
  6. Phorm Fighting Tightening Balance Sheet AND Critics
  7. Verizon Named Most Trusted Company With Your Privacy. Really?
  8. Court: Uncle Sam Must Hand Over Immunity Lobbying Docs
Forums » Shocker: Informed Consumers Want Privacy, Not Tailored Ads
view: topics flat text 
Post a:

baineschile
2600
Premium
join:2008-05-10
Sterling Heights, MI

The lesser of two evils

Ads will get to consumers; there is no avoiding that with TV and the internet in this day and age. That being said, I would rather have ads tailored to me (fun electronic gadgets) rather that the generic ads that I see (tampons, snuggies, etc).
jc100

join:2002-04-10

Re: The lesser of two evils

I'd rather NOT have any, how about them apples. I PAY for my internet. If the ISP wants to give me it for free, and generate ad revenue in order to supplement the cost, then by all means. Until such time, piss off.

damonlab
Premium
join:2001-05-02
Detroit, MI
clubs:

Re: The lesser of two evils

said by jc100 See Profile :

I'd rather NOT have any, how about them apples. I PAY for my internet. If the ISP wants to give me it for free, and generate ad revenue in order to supplement the cost, then by all means. Until such time, piss off.
Here is a twist...
I PAY for my cable TV. If the cable TV provider wants to give me it for free, and generate ad revenue in order to supplement the cost, then by all means. Until such time, piss off.
jc100

join:2002-04-10

Re: The lesser of two evils

Well, that argument is true and FAILS in the same sentence.

True: Yes, so long as YOU PAY for your service, you should NOT be forcibly subjected to Revenue Generating Ads during your viewing experience.

Fails: Ads on TV are NOT behaviorally tracking your activity, collecting data on you, and selling it off. The ONLY way TV stations can tell viewing habits is if people agree to install Nielson boxes or fill out surveys.

Hence, one beast is FAR DIFFERENT than the other.

Laughing Man
Stand Alone Complex
Premium
join:2008-03-17
Louisville, KY
clubs:
·AT&T DSL Service


1 edit

Re: The lesser of two evils

said by jc100 See Profile :

Fails: Ads on TV are NOT behaviorally tracking your activity, collecting data on you, and selling it off. The ONLY way TV stations can tell viewing habits is if people agree to install Nielson boxes or fill out surveys.
Not if cable gets their way.
Back in March of 2008, Comcast's Gerard Kunkel proclaimed that Comcast was experimenting with embedding cameras in your DVR or cable box, allowing the company to know exactly who is watching what, at what time.

michaelp95
Premium
join:2001-08-23
Tucson, AZ
·Comcast

Re: The lesser of two evils

said by Laughing Man See Profile :

said by jc100 See Profile :

Fails: Ads on TV are NOT behaviorally tracking your activity, collecting data on you, and selling it off. The ONLY way TV stations can tell viewing habits is if people agree to install Nielson boxes or fill out surveys.
Not if cable gets their way.
Back in March of 2008, Comcast's Gerard Kunkel proclaimed that Comcast was experimenting with embedding cameras in your DVR or cable box, allowing the company to know exactly who is watching what, at what time.
Voice from the Comcast box watching "Excuse me sir, I notice your underwear has a few holes in it, would you like me to tune in QVC so you can order some new boxers?"

That's targeting....bullseye.

birdfeedr
Premium,MVM
join:2001-08-11
Warwick, RI
·Verizon FIOS

said by jc100 See Profile :

The ONLY way TV stations can tell viewing habits is if people agree to install Nielson boxes or fill out surveys.
How do you know Verizon's internet-connected STB does not upload channel history? There's a lot of obscured traffic traffic going out if you happen to sniff the WAN connection.

From Karl's article
quote:
Consumers -- at least the informed ones -- apparently think otherwise.
The informed internet consumer *knows* there is no real privacy. Anything they say about privacy is only a half-truth.

TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast

said by jc100 See Profile :

Ads on TV are NOT behaviorally tracking your activity, collecting data on you, and selling it off.
Cable companies are starting to collect that info when they roll out the new 2-way STBs.

bender
Bite my shiny metal ass
Premium
join:2005-03-19
Evanston, IL
clubs:

Re: The lesser of two evils

i'm just glad that this kind of stuff doesn't happen with digital OTA converters....... or does it?

TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast

Re: The lesser of two evils

said by bender See Profile :

i'm just glad that this kind of stuff doesn't happen with digital OTA converters....... or does it?
Right now, to the best of my knowledge, OTA digital is 1-way only. There is no mechanism to collect viewing information. Not to say that couldn't change down the line years from now.

TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
·Sprint Mobile Broa..
·Comcast

said by jc100 See Profile :

I'd rather NOT have any,
Adblock Plus on FF. IE7Pro on IE.

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
Choosing the lesser of two evils is still choosing evil.

(You can thank Jerry Garcia for that quote.)
jjeffeory

join:2002-12-04
USA

I agree that there is a market for this, but I do not want to pay for the ads to be sent to me. I also do not like the idea of tailored ads. We have several people with varied tastes who use the IP address here. I don't want to be spammed my crap AND their crap too.
Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ

my honest dislike is ads on the ISP portal sites, i think they should all go away when you login. i mean seriously i know why the ISPs promote using their portal vs POP3, it isnt just support(POP3 can burn in hell when its allowed to be used by someone who needs help finding the tools menu) but also to funnel people across the portal and generate views for the ads.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports
ShellMMG

join:2009-04-16
Grass Lake, MI
·Alltel Axess

Remember this movie?

One of the scariest scenes on film is from the "Minority Report." Tom Cruise is hustling through a shopping mall and is assaulted by a barrage of holographic ads, mentioning him by name and trying to get his attention! I dislike shopping malls as it is, and that scared me off for a good long time.

What part of obnoxious, offensive, intrusive and annoying don't advertisers get??

jefe
Premium
join:2001-05-19
Northport, NY
·Verizon FIOS

Re: Remember this movie?

I too think of that scene in "Minority Report" every time the subject of targeted advertising comes up.

It seems to me that advertising has become a game similar to spamming or malware. One set of players is always thinking of new ways to target you. On the other side, most of us are thinking of ways to avoid being targeted.

I see advertising in the same light. I rarely watch live TV, preferring to record any programing I want to watch so I can skip through the commercials.

Ad Muncher is one of my favorite all time PC applications. It pretty much shields me from browsing ads.

And the, of course, there's Spamassasin at my email server level. It pretty much shields me from the tons of crapola spam that I'd otherwise get bombarded with every day.

I can only speak for myself, of course, but the one type of advertising I still don't mind is print ads. I read the local newspaper, or a magazine, or get a flyer in the mail, and I don't mind the ads. If they interest me, I read them. If not I just skip right on by.

But TV, radio, or web ads....no thanks. Not for me. In my case, at least, spending money and effort on targeting me is a waste of that time and money. I won't be paying attention to your ads.
stufried
Premium
join:2003-10-13
·Verizon BroadbandA..

Re: Remember this movie?

I am willing to share a basic profile with a central repository regarding the advertising that will least offend me, but I don't like the combing of my personal data. For example, I would tell them not to bother with hunting and fishing, but that I do like travel and food.

While I would prefer no advertising, I'm not willing to pay for a completely pay internet. Some advertising on web pages, etc. is therefore a cost of doing business.

I'm also not sure that profiling the websites I watch will always tell you my position. I am a student of the Middle East. I read both pro-Israeli and pro-Palestinian websites. I also read Al Jazeera, but also read Hareetz. A truly smart algorithm would tell you that this person doesn't favor either side and try to sell me a subscription to Foreign Affairs, the Foreign Policy, etc. The way things work right now, I'm likely to get adds to support both sides under the current structure and wind up on a State Department watch list.

FastiBook

join:2003-01-08
Newtown, PA
·Verizon FIOS

I don't know about you...

But i like seeing a variety of ads, not ones based on my ****ing searches on google, or ones based on what sites i go to, i'm a bit more varied as a person than searches and a few specific websites.

Why do companies think bombarding you with specified ads are better than keeping costs low and doing it how it's always been done.

- A
--
LETS GO METS!
axiomatic

join:2006-08-23
Tomball, TX

Lets make a deal ISP's

Hey ISP's, I will continue to allow you to make money off my search data, and also let you continue to serve me up customized advertisements, if you guys drop the CAPS and the METERS.

Deal?

KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
·AT&T Yahoo
·AT&T DSL Service
·Cox HSI
·AT&T Southwest

Re: Lets make a deal ISP's

No Deal. You just don't understand.

You will pay monthly base rates.

You will be metered and capped, and you will pay for overages.

Also, we well sell and exploit your surfing history, search data, profile and demographics info. You see, it's all about what we want (Tons of money) and not about what you want (better service, competition, lower prices, and privacy.)

Bow down! Bend Over! Here we come!
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini

Laughing Man
Stand Alone Complex
Premium
join:2008-03-17
Louisville, KY
clubs:

Re: Lets make a deal ISP's

That reminds me of a good quote, "Resistance is futile. We wish to improve ourselves. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service ours."

michaelp95
Premium
join:2001-08-23
Tucson, AZ
·Comcast

Re: Lets make a deal ISP's

said by Laughing Man See Profile :

That reminds me of a good quote, "Resistance is futile. We wish to improve ourselves. We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service ours."
We don't want to be assimilated.
SuperWISP

join:2007-04-17
Laramie, WY
ISPs have no interest in invading your privacy.

Google does.
jjeffeory

join:2002-12-04
USA

Re: Lets make a deal ISP's

said by SuperWISP See Profile :

ISPs have no interest in invading your privacy.

Google does.
You're not Qwest, at&t, Verizon, or Comcast. You may not be interested, but THEY are, and frankly you're too small to worry about. THEY are not.
axiomatic

join:2006-08-23
Tomball, TX

2 edits
That is a bunch of whargarbl SuperWISP.

You can tell that to my ISP Comcast.

Wait... nevermind... I obviously have forgotten who I'm talking too.
Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
difference is google isnt hiding the fact they want to suck in all the information in the world.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports
cpsycho

join:2008-06-03
Orangeville, ON

DAMN GROUPS!

[sarcasm]
These groups are satanic, socialist, baby killers, trying to inform people and break the free market.
[/sarcasm]

bender
Bite my shiny metal ass
Premium
join:2005-03-19
Evanston, IL
clubs:
·T-Mobile US
·Vonage
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Midwest
·Mediacom

Re: DAMN GROUPS!

said by cpsycho See Profile :

[sarcasm]
These groups are satanic, socialist, baby killers, trying to inform people and break the free market.
[/sarcasm]
you forgot that they want to kill grandma with death panels.

Wizeguy

join:2008-08-23
Safety Harbor, FL

You are being watched!

"There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork" (G.Orwell 1984)
beaups

join:2003-08-11
Hilliard, OH

Put your money where your mouth is

And pull the "internet-centric" ads off BBR's homepage. Why when I come to this site do I see ads for broadband products? Sounds like tailored ads to me. Wait....

bender
Bite my shiny metal ass
Premium
join:2005-03-19
Evanston, IL
clubs:

Re: Put your money where your mouth is

i see no ads. but then again, i'm premium. maybe that makes a difference.

Laughing Man
Stand Alone Complex
Premium
join:2008-03-17
Louisville, KY
clubs:

Re: Put your money where your mouth is

Nope, I'm not premium and I don't have any ads.

A456732

@rr.com

Re: Put your money where your mouth is

I'm with you. I'm not even loged in and I don't see any adds anywhere, not even the home page. Maybe it is because I don't have Javascript enabled.

tmpchaos
Requiescat in pace
Premium,Mod
join:2000-04-28
Hoboken, NJ
clubs:
Go here: »/join and click the checkbox about banner ads.

bhan261

join:2001-02-12
New York, NY

TANSTAAFL

I work for a fairly large, well-known news site. Our worldwide news gathering operation costs us about $11 million/year in salaries, benefits etc. That doesn't count the additional costs of other overhead and hosting/CDN. Without ad revenue, how exactly are we supposed to recoup these costs? And if those ads are more relevant and interesting to each individual, how is that wrong?

asellus
Premium
join:2004-09-24
Malaysia

Re: TANSTAAFL

said by bhan261 See Profile :

I work for a fairly large, well-known news site. Our worldwide news gathering operation costs us about $11 million/year in salaries, benefits etc. That doesn't count the additional costs of other overhead and hosting/CDN. Without ad revenue, how exactly are we supposed to recoup these costs? And if those ads are more relevant and interesting to each individual, how is that wrong?
Do it WSJ way and charge for a subscription!
--
1098139570

bhan261

join:2001-02-12
New York, NY

Re: TANSTAAFL

Sorry...even the WSJ can't make enough on selling subs to cover their costs of producing the site. They HAVE to sell ads, too.
bt

join:2009-02-26
canada
·Rogers Hi-Speed

said by bhan261 See Profile :

And if those ads are more relevant and interesting to each individual, how is that wrong?
It's wrong when it's at an unacceptable cost to the individual. While the monetary cost to the individual may be nothing, there are many people out there who would consider the privacy costs associated with individually tailored ads to be completely unacceptable.

Many sites that do this would probably find their readership drop quickly if every one of their visitors was actively aware that they were doing so.

bhan261

join:2001-02-12
New York, NY

Re: TANSTAAFL

See joebarnhart's post below.

Do you use a credit card? You're tracked.
Do you use frequent shopper cards? You're tracked.
Do you subscribe to magazines? You're tracked.
Do you use a cellphone? You're tracked.
Do you have EZ-Pass? You're tracked.
etc...etc...etc...

And each of them are selling "your" data to other marketers.

w0g
o.O

join:2001-08-30
Portland, OR
clubs:
·Clearwire Wireless

It's pretty invasive

I browse over to Dell.com and all of a sudden Yahoo! and many other websites know about it and start giving me Dell advertisements. They track it down to the exact items I was looking at even. I click around google and amazon and the items I searched for or browsed are also used for the same thing - it's like everywhere these websites are sharing information amongst one another, tracking by IP address, cookies, whatever, and they even have my location name and address because I've done business with these companies before. I was a little surprised how intrigent it was , I'm not a fan of having so much information kept about me and my interests and habits.

dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ

Guess what?

1. I don't block ads.
2. I would never buy anything based on an ad i saw online or T.V.!
--
When I gez aju zavateh na nalechoo more new yonooz tonigh molinigh - Ken Lee
joebarnhart
Paxio evangelist

join:2005-12-15
Santa Clara, CA

Anybody remember McNealy's famous rant?

"You have zero privacy anyway -- get over it!"

»www.wired.com/politics/law/news/···01/17538

Guess Sun wasn't too concerned, either.

Forums » Shocker: Informed Consumers Want Privacy, Not Tailored Ads


Saturday, 21-Nov 14:28:25 Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Hosting by www.nac.net - DSL,Hosting & Co-lo | feedback | contact
over 10 years online! © 1999-2009 dslreports.com.