Ads and tracking going hand-in-hand is the problem. If the advertising industry had not embraced tracking I think that the backlash against advertising would not be as strong as it is. It should be possible to receive an advert without also giving up a huge chunk of privacy.
That's one stance, but do you think it results in a more relevant experience for most people (emphasis on "most) viewing ads when they see products that are more likely to interest them (because of audience data or retargeting data) vs. a generic ad?
And from an advertiser standpoint, if the targeted approach is vastly more profitable than the untargeted approach of how things worked in the early Mad Men days (and it most definitely is), I have to say I can't really blame them for taking that path.
I'd be curious if there are any companies out there who position themselves as "ethical advertisers" and do what you outlined in terms of advertising without the privacy tradeoff. I'd also be curious how they might fare against competitors who don't take that stance. Again, people are voting with their wallets, and right now they are saying that they are ok giving up their data in exchange for free content, and that they'll continue buying things from companies who leverage said data to communicate with them.
> That's one stance, but do you think it results in a more relevant experience for most people (emphasis on "most) viewing ads when they see products that are more likely to interest them (because of audience data or retargeting data) vs. a generic ad?
They may spend less money, so it is clearly a 'win' for the advertiser and the property to do as much tracking and profiling as they can get away with (and they do).
> And from an advertiser standpoint, if the targeted approach is vastly more profitable than the untargeted approach of how things worked in the early Mad Men days (and it most definitely is), I have to say I can't really blame them for taking that path.
I don't blame them either, but then they should not blame the users for the inevitable backlash.
> I'd be curious if there are any companies out there who position themselves as "ethical advertisers" and do what you outlined in terms of advertising without the privacy tradeoff.
Unfortunately the good are suffering with the bad.
> I'd also be curious how they might fare against competitors who don't take that stance.
They made less money in the short term. But in the longer term there may be some life there, too early to tell.
> Again, people are voting with their wallets, and right now they are saying that they are ok giving up their data in exchange for free content, and that they'll continue buying things from companies who leverage said data to communicate with them.
That's mostly because people have no idea what is in their profiles in the various silos.
It's a bit like getting people to click blindfolded on a EULA and then later to say 'hey, you agreed to this', which in my opinion is simply not fair and taking advantage.
I think your last point on comparing against EULA's isn't the best fit here. If I see an ad, the actual data that led to me seeing that ad doesn't suddenly make the product I'm seeing an ad for less of what I might need. It might make me question the business I would buy it from, but there's a big difference between agreeing to purchase something where the terms of the transaction are known (you are buying X, this is the return policy, etc.) vs. clicking an EULA where you decided not to read it (which is the other reason I think this was a poor example...the EULA is there, people just choose not to read it).
Ah, but you got the timing wrong. The EULA reference is about the terms and conditions under which you are viewing the website - and therefore the advertising and all associated tracking mechanisms -, this happens prior to you viewing the ad and once you are on the page you are somehow magically bound by these terms but all the bad stuff has already happened.
Ah--sorry, I thought you were drawing an analogy against software installation EULA's that people typically click through.
I definitely concede this is a valid point in that visitors aren't exactly given a chance to opt out. I think we can both agree that if it were opt in, that wouldn't satisfy advertisers, but I think the EU approach around cookies is a bit heavy handed and ruins web experiences. I wonder if there isn't a happy middle ground somewhere.
Again, make no mistake, I think users should be in control of their data and data ownership is going to be one of the hot button issues of the next decade as tracking only becomes more pervasive and data storage becomes cheaper. But I also think that a large number of people like to jump to the conclusion of "I hate advertising" while at the same time buying stuff because of relevant, highly-targeted ads. What people don't realize is that publishers and such would have to resort to even more aggressive placements and approaches to make up the greater lack of revenue they'd suffer if they weren't able to offer highly-targeted inventory.
Jacques, you are definitely one of the standout posters on HN and I've come to recognize and respect your viewpoints as someone who has a pretty solid understanding of the ad industry and its various components. While I appreciate the perspective you painted in this piece, I'd challenge you to play devil's advocate and write another version of the story from the standpoint of an advertiser, a publisher, or a consumer who is less sensitive to advertising than you or I may be. This is a complicated issue and I don't think it is as black and white as your story makes it out to be. Exploring all sides of a problem tends to bring out those gray areas than just a single viewpoint.
Plus I'm a fan of your writing style, so I'd love to see this sort of analogy extended to the other players in the game ;)
Tough challenge, but I just might take you up on that. Keep in mind it took me > than a month in wall clock time to write this post so it will be a while if anything comes of it. I don't write these things in one go, I write an outline, let them sit for a bit, then update and bit by bit it becomes what I'd like to send out. So no 'quick response time' on anything like this.
But that's definitely a valid request, the viewpoint shift alone would be worth doing because it may help to figure out what could be done instead.
I think the publisher is the most interesting perspective of the options you listed and one that I can identify with.
Awesome and glad you find it to be an interesting challenge. Of course totally understand if it falls off the list, but I for one would love to read it if you decide to do it.
