Do we need consensus on privacy?

A healthy debate about online privacy and ads

I read Benedict Evans article today titled “Ads, privacy and confusion” and I thought I would rebut some of his opinions as the inaugural piece for The Rebuttal.

I came up with the idea for this blog post, not to start fights, but to engage in healthy debate. If you have watched “The Social Dilemma” then you may be aware that a lot of the news we see, especially on social media platforms, tends to reinforce our opinions and beliefs. Personally, I believe this is a foundational fault of social media software development. America was built on the concept of debate and so should social media. Wouldn’t it be interesting to see a social media site built where every article you read then shows you an article that provides an alternate viewpoint?

And that is why I find Benedict Evans’s article so fascinating. First, he is embarking on healthy debate about the concept of online privacy. Second, he challenges that we are even asking the right questions.

Mr. Evans asks, “First, can we achieve the underlying economic aims of online advertising in a private way?” I interpreted his answer as a challenge - that the current way is private because advertisers don’t really want to know who you are. I disagree. Advertisers do want to know who you are as an individual. “Personalization” has been a strong movement for about a decade now. I used to work for a company that claimed its value was in personalized content. I believe that the adtech industry got excited when it began to see the vast piles of semi-random, personal data and metadata. Even though it was an unwieldy dataset, the possibilities of how to use an individual’s interest data and metadata to influence them was thrilling and a whole new wave of startups emerged to help find, clean and analyze this data to send 1:1, personalized ads.

I will address his second question before I continue to argue why I think advertising likes personalization.

Benedict’s second question, “what counts as ‘private’ and how can you build ‘private’ systems if we don’t know?” Now, I don’t know how old Mr. Evans is, but I remember having only 4 channels on T.V.

Since we are talking about ads, I promise this is a relevant memory.

While watching T.V. back then, you were subject to very long ad intervals aka commercials. Soon, the advertisers caught on that people would walk away from the T.V., to get a snack or whatever, while the ads came on. Clearly, this was no good, so then they started making shorter ads and showing them at more frequent intervals. This caused many people to race to the bathroom, LOL, but it accomplished the goal of keeping people watching. Just go to the bathroom in between shows at the top of the hour or half hour.

So then what happened? The DVR came along. Now, people could record their shows and skip! through the ads. Disaster. My point is, people hate advertising because it interrupts them. So, advertisers had to get even more clever. They had to be creative, funny, attention-grabbing to capture people’s attention, like a show does.

How many people watch the Super Bowl just for the ads? I mean, talk about the most successful advertising campaign of all time.

Then the internet came along and it was a new medium to interrupt people’s workflow to show them ads. As people started browsing the internet and using it more, there was more data on buying patterns, cultural differences, gender differences, age differences, etc. And as the technology improved, so did the capability to collect more and more interesting data about buying decision-making and patterns. The big data era meant that we had the processing power to collect and store more and more data, individual data, and the advertisers thought that making the ads personal would really grab people’s attention. They didn’t think that people would find it creepy. Do you turn your head when someone calls your name? Rhetorical question.

So, I don’t think the question is “what counts as ‘private’ and how can you build ‘private’ systems if we don’t know?” I think the real question, in this context, is a throwback question, how to let people know about my brand so that they buy my stuff? Or maybe, does advertising have to interrupt someone while they are in the middle of doing something? Do we really have to grab people’s attention in order to get them to buy things? Is current advertising making it easier to find things, or harder? Did advertising have to get into the realm of privacy in the first place?

Mr. Evans then discusses two very important points. That Apple’s branding on privacy is about on device privacy. And Google’s branding on privacy is about 1st party vs 3rd party. Is that the definition of online privacy? He rightly brings up cookies and the annoying cookie consent banner. Ugh. Just another interruption in a person’s workflow. I 100% agree with Mr. Evans that the cookie pop up consent notice is the most annoying invention on the internet. But is it advancing privacy?

I do believe strongly in the power of consent but perhaps I have a different point of view on it. For example, why not have the pop up say “click this to allow cookies.” Cookies have gotten such a bad reputation that you would probably roll your eyes at me. But, why? If I know that cookies allow third parties to collect data on my browsing session of that website and I am looking for a car, then perhaps I would say “yes” because then I know I will receive advertising and, even better, discounts and deal offers from other car companies. I will have more awareness, choice and perhaps a better deal just from allowing a cookie.

Mr. Evans’s third question, about how does the competitive landscape change with all these privacy initiatives in advertising, is a really hard question. Are we creating anti-competitive behavior by relying on the privacy excuse? Apple makes it difficult to move away from Apple devices because you like that they store all the data on the device and no one else does? Google is the only search engine because it prevents tracking by third parties? Thank goodness for Tor, eh? I don’t think privacy would be the reason monopolies are created, but bifurcating the internet could.

So, Mr. Evans, I liked your article a lot. It gave me a lot to think about. There is a fine line between concierge attention (comes from someone you know) and creepiness (comes from someone you don’t know) that the internet has to address. Like you, I hope to be a part of that movement.

But, I will still mostly watch the Super Bowl for the ads, because I think they are amazing and entertaining. I will also happily watch T.V. shows and movies that creatively incorporate ads into the actual story line. I will mostly listen to the ads on the Smartless podcast because I find that Will, Jason and Sean do a great job of making the ads entertaining. I also continue to receive some comfort that my Apple device keeps things on the device.

So, let me end this with two questions back to you. Did online advertising get it right in the first place in terms of, should it rely on indirect buying intent data for display? Taking it another step, did we ever get consensus on what should be public online?