'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

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 (3)

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

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

For at least a few years now, Apple's Safari browser blocks by default all third-party tracking cookies. This feature means that Apple has been actively protecting 100+ million Internet users from tracking by the Internet ad industry. With this massive do-not-tracking technology in place, we still to seem to have a thriving Internet. Why has the Internet ad industry been so silent on what Apple has been doing for its customers?

John Swift of MA 10:55AM January 04, 2011

advertisement

Debate Club

Was 2011 One of the Worst Years for the U.S. Government in American History?

Experts debate where 2011 ranks among Washington's worst years.

Latest Video

Thomas Jefferson Street Blog

What the GOP Should Do if Obamacare Falls

If Obamacare is struck down by the Supreme Court, the Democrats are responsible for proposing another plan.

Barack Obama and George Bush Show Congress How to Act Like Adults

Obama and Bush are capable of acting like adults. Why isn't Congress?

Mitt Romney Should Put Up or Shut Up on Syria

The Republican candidate has proven he doesn't have the foreign policy credentials necessary to be president.

Mitt Romney's Colorado Disconnect

The presumptive GOP nominee seems unwilling or unable to talk about local issues in a swing state he desperately needs to win.

Donald Trump Makes Kim Kardashian Look Good

At least Kim Kardashian doesn't take herself seriously.

The Vietnam War Still Haunts Us

History rhymes once again, thanks so much.

'Transcripters' Make Birthers Look Smart

Now the fringe right wants the president's university grades to prove he wasn't a good student.

Obama Must Do More to Protect the Intellectual Property Industry

The Obama administration needs to protect the industry's creativity and innovation.

advertisement