So I was looking at the Reuters this morning and saw an article that kind of annoyed me. Not because of the reporting (top-notch) but because the article highlighted a lack of personal responsibility and a certain sense of entitlement that really bugs me.
Many people are uncomfortable with Web sites customizing content to people's personal profiles, according to a new survey.
"There's a creepy factor and a fear of the unknown that people don't want to deal with," said Michelle Warren, senior research analyst at Info-Tech Research Group in London, Ontario.
"The notion that there's a privacy issue in someone's email account hits a little too close to home for some," she added.
Nearly 60 percent of 2,513 people in the United States questioned in a Harris Interactive poll said they were uneasy when Web sites use information about personal online activity to tailor advertisements or content.
In a nutshell, the story related how a lot of people are uncomfortable with websites tracking their activity for the purposes of targeted advertising. I understand that some people find it creepy, but it's nothing new.
Let's first look at the example of a retail website. Most sites like that, whether they're the online arm of a brick-and-mortar (like Target or The GAP) or a purely online entity (like Amazon), keep track of your recent purchases. That's what allows you, after logging in, to see items that you might also be interested in. Wow, they're using your purchase history to try and sell you more stuff. Scandalous! Traditional retailers have been collecting customer information to target advertising forever. How many times have you gone to RadioShack or Trader Joe's and thought "Why exactly do they need my ZIP code?" It's so that they know what areas would probably respond to a mass mailing. See? They're collecting your personal information to try and sell you more stuff. Here's where personal responsibility comes in - if you don't like it, don't shop there. Online or at the mall, if you don't like what a business is doing, you don't have to shop there.
Example number two would be free sites, like Google. Here's a little newsflash - the bandwidth, the employees, GMail, and all of the Google perks you hear about (on-site massages, gourmet food in the cafeteria, etc) aren't free. They need to pay for them, and they do that through advertising. They sell that advertising by marketing how effective it is. They create that effectiveness by tailoring the ads you see to your search terms. Once again, there's a non-internet example of a free service that is paid for by advertising. I think you've heard of it. It's called Broadcast Television. And the ads are targeted. Ever notice that you see different ads during a football game than during Oprah? They're assuming that if you're interested in the program that you'll be interested in a certain product. The same way that if you do a Google search for Axl Rose you'll probably see ads for Guns n' Roses merchandise. This speaks to the sense of entitlement - If they don't run ads then how do you expect them to provide you with a free service? They aren't supported by tax dollars and they don't have a mysterious philanthropist benefactor like Michael Knight did.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that collecting customer information isn't even remotely new. As long as they aren't using the information to send you illegal text messages, they're well within their rights to show you targeted advertising based on what you looked for or bought recently.
Details at Reuters.
Leave a comment