The FTC Behavioral Advertising submission process has essentially divided into two camps (not a surprise outcome) … industry self-regulation or the consumer advocacy position of a (recurring) call for a ‘Do-Not-Track’ Register. Refer Reuters article by Diane Bartz entitled Consumer groups urge "do not track" registry.

The economic stakes are high for advertising networks and behavioral targeting …Multi-billion dollar revenue streams. They should be focused on the case for self-regulation given the stakes.

The case for privacy and choice for the consumer is equally strong. Tracking online activities and ‘behaviors’ – especially the extent to which this arises as well as correlation of ‘offline’ data sources – at best, can be a little creepy. Similar to say, eavesdropping all of my phone conversations … or tracking everything that I watch on TV via say, a set top box / DVR …

This is not a new debate – the positions have not changed from either side, nor are they likely to … It is good to see that a middle ground of ‘sensitive’ is emerging.

The challenge here is relatively straightforward … Advertisers and publishers want to understand interests so they target relevant ads and content – for a better experience. Consumer advocates want privacy.

My $0.02 – innovate to provide privacy and choice for consumers, while providing consumers the ability to express their interests – without providing personally identifiable demographics …

The solution lay in not ‘mixing’ interests with demographics. After all, if you want to market a surfboard to me you don’t really need to know where I live do you now? You just need to know I’m a surfer. I’m happy to tell you I like surfing, not where I live.

digg    del.icio.us