'Do Not Track' Rules Would Put a Stop to the Internet As We Know It

These would be nothing like the National Do Not Call Registry

January 3, 2011 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (4)

Michael Zaneis is senior vice president and general counsel of the Interactive Advertising Bureau

Check the weather, peruse the latest sports scores, find out if that sweater you fell in love with has finally gone on sale. Chances are you've done at least one of these things today online and none of it would be possible without digital advertising. The Internet has quickly transformed our daily activities, giving us access to anything and everything with a click. And just as quickly, it could go away.

The recent and ill-informed calls for a national "Do Not Track" list, a theoretical mechanism to stop online data collection, might resonate with the public because of the apparent resemblance to the National Do Not Call Registry, but the two are similar in name only. You cannot simply turn off the data exchanges between parties that allow you to, for example, navigate from one website to another. Stop that sharing and you put a stop to the Internet as we know it. [See a slide show of the Best Apps for iPhone, iPad.]

Assuming this is not the result that privacy advocates desire, perhaps their target (no pun intended) is the variety of freely available content and services that consumers currently enjoy. The Federal Trade Commission and others have lauded an upcoming feature in the newest version of Internet Explorer as a simple implementation of Do Not Track. But upon further inspection, this looks less like a viable Do Not Track mechanism and more like a censorship tool. Imagine you visit abcnews.com to get your morning news, but the lead AP story is missing, the local ABC affiliate's coverage is nothing more than a blank box, and your sports scores provided via ESPN are unavailable. This is the consumer experience some would prefer you have online, putting their own parochial interests ahead of actually educating consumers and empowering them to make informed decisions. Customizing content and advertising to an individual computer does not result in identity theft, there is no Big Brother watching on the other end of these anonymous interactions, and to equate it to cyberstalking is both patently false and dangerous.

Here's what you need to know: Advertisers and publishers are not in the business of gathering and selling information on individuals. What they are doing is what advertisers have done for more than a hundred years—creating groups of users and making educated guesses, now based on browser actions, on what might potentially be the interests of those groups. Men who like sports, for example, may be a perfect target for a sports drink, but not for lipstick. How that relevant advertising is delivered is precisely how the rest of the relevant content on the Internet is delivered.

So if the creation of a Do Not Track list is not so simple, perhaps the advocates' true motivation is to attack the economic engine that fuels the Internet—advertising. The stakes are high for those that would do away with relevant online advertising. Our industry is responsible for $300 billion of economic activity in the United States and directly employs more than 1.2 million Americans. But make no mistake about it, the interactive ad industry strongly supports consumer privacy. We've had a self-regulatory program, www.aboutads.info, in place for more than a decade, and we are currently updating that program to ensure it keeps pace with new technologies and evolving consumer expectations. [See our slide show in Opinion: 5 Ways New Media Are Changing Politics.]

The industry is delivering on the promises that the Do Not Track rhetoric cannot. Think about the diminished consumer experience that heavy-handed regulation could cause and contrast it to the positive experience you get when you add yourself to the Do Not Call list. Think about that the next time you check the sports scores on your smartphone.

Read why 'Do Not Track' rules would preserve privacy by Federal Trade Commission Chairman Jon Leibowitz.

Tags:
FTC

Reader Comments Read all comments (4)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

This is BS. All I hear from this media mogul, who is, by the way, obviously completely out of touch with anything web related, is "PLEASE DONT TAKE AWAY MY INCOME" Die in a fire.

Web Developer of FL 2:07PM September 24, 2012

Biggest load of Horse-Schitt I ever read. These companies are nothing more than criminals. Anyone collecting data profiles is a threat to everyone.

M. of IA 3:06PM February 06, 2012

Solid argument, but you neglect the issue of consumer choice. Shouldn't individuals have the option to opt-out of online behavioral tracking, just as they can opt-out of hard-copy mailings and phone calls? If the advertising industry wants to continue to track people online, there should be something in it for the people. The "benefit" of targeted, personal ads isn't truly a benefit to us--the advertisers paint it that way, but who really WANTS to be bombarded with ads, personal or not? As it stands, behavioral tracking is one-sided: it's a massive benefit to the advertisers and a hindrance to the users.

Currently, I use Abine's Privacy Suite software to opt *myself* out (http://abine.com/products.php), but not many people are aware that A), they're being tracked online, and B), what they can do about it.

Sarah of CT 1:06PM January 04, 2011

advertisement

Latest Videos

Thomas Jefferson Street Blog

President Obama's Code Pink Heckler Medea Benjamin Was Plain Rude

It's become acceptable for people to interrupt the president while he is delivering a formal speech on a deadly serious topic.

Obama Commerce Nominee Penny Pritzker’s Tax Problem

Obama’s Commerce Department nominee has some Romney-esque tax issues.

Oklahoma Tornado Reminds Us of the Value of Teachers

The Oklahoma tornado reminds us of all the roles teachers take on.

IRS, AP and James Rosen Scandals Strike at the First Amendment

The Obama scandals paint a picture of an administration at odds with the First Amendment.

Anthony Weiner Is Too Liberal to Be New York City Mayor

New York City doesn't need another Democratic mayor.

Organizations Masquerading as Tax-Exempt is the Real IRS Scandal

The real scandal at the IRS is electioneering groups getting tax-exempt status.

E.W. Jackson Proves the Tea Party Learned Nothing

By nominating E.W. Jackson, Virginia Republicans hope extremism will save them.

IRS, AP and Benghazi Are Not Obama Scandals

The word "scandal" doesn't appropriately describe anything going on in Washington these days.

advertisement