Recently in FTC Category

Reuters has a story about how two major consumer groups want to have a "Do Not Track" list created by the FTC.  The list would let you tell the Web at large not to track your information for advertising purposes.

Two consumer groups asked the Federal Trade Commission on Tuesday to create a "do not track list" that would allow computer users to bar advertisers from collecting information about them.

The Consumer Federation of America and the Consumers Union also urged the FTC to bar collection of health information and other sensitive data by companies that do business on the Internet unless a consumer consents.

The call echoed those of other privacy advocates who filed statements with the FTC on Internet companies' use of "behavioral advertising." That is the practice of tracking a computer user's activities online, including Web searches and sites visited, to target advertisements to the individual consumer.


The main concern, and one we would agree with, is that certain, sensitive information not be tracked.  In fact, Andrew wrote an awesome post back on the 10th about a preemptive strike by members of the National Advertising Initiative.  They came up with a list of categories of information that would not be tracked by their ads.

I understand that people find having their digital purchases tracked.  I posted on it myself last week.

Seeing the article made me angry.  I actually got angry.  The sites that (usually) use the targeted ads (or any ads) are usually free to use.  If they aren't charging you a fee and they don't have ads on the site, how in the hell are they supposed to keep the lights on?  If you can tell me how someone is supposed to operate a service for free without advertising, let me know.  Ok, I know some of you are going to say "I don't mind ads but why do they have to track my activity?"  It's all about effectiveness.  A lot of sites get paid by the number of ads that are clicked.  That's why targeted ads are so popular.

If you don't want an advertising firm to see your information you have options -

1) As I mentioned in my post, DON'T VISIT SITES THAT USE TARGETED ADS!!!  No one is making you go to a website.  If you don't like a site's content do you have to go there?  No.  If you don't like the ads do you have to go there?  Same answer!

2) Clear your cache.  If you don't want your history tracked, how about you clear it out every once in a while?  It's like the goddamned V-Chip.  The tool is there, but because people don't want to learn how to use it they'd rather bitch and moan and have the F_C handle it for them (FCC in the case of V-Chip stuff, FTC if it has to do with our current topic).


It's just so maddening that people can't just grow up and take responsibility for themselves.  I feel like we're wasting tons and tons of time and money for something that people can take care of on their own if they'd take about a minute and a half to think about it.

Ok, sorry for ranting.  I'm going to go read about drunken celebs and see what's going on on the Twitter to try and bring back happy thoughts.

Posted to Advertising | All | FTC | Privacy
So, last year the Federal Trade Commission announced a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on "behavioral targeting" on which comments are due Friday. So, the National Advertising Initiative has proposed their own set of rules in the hopes that the FTC will adopt them instead of more restrictive ones that the public might want.

The New York Times Bits blog picked up on some highlights of the NAI's proposal, including the stuff that they won't "remember" that you search for:


The essence of the proposal is to identify sensitive subjects that advertising companies should not keep track of. Here is the list:

1) Certain medical/health conditions-

  • HIV/ AIDS status
  • Sexually-related conditions (e.g., sexually transmitted diseases, erectile
  • dysfunction)
  • Psychiatric conditions
  • Cancer status
  • Abortion-related

2) Certain personal life information-

  • Sexual behavior/orientation/identity (i.e., Lesbian/Gay/Bisexual/Transgender)
  • Criminal victim status (e.g., rape victim status)

The association also published a list of other topics that advertising companies may choose to consider sensitive, but then again they may not. This is the list of those topics the group suggests require "independent business judgment about what consumers could find particularly objectionable, but often do not."

Age, addictions (e.g., drugs, alcohol, gambling), alienage or nationality, criminal history, death, disability, ethnic affiliation, marital status, philosophical beliefs, political affiliation or opinions, pregnancy, race identification, religious affiliation (or lack thereof), trade union membership


Bits noticed that targeting ads to dead people might be OK under the NAI rules. Also included is a restriction on monitoring for advertising related to topics for children under 13, which is part of the FTC's NPRM. Technically, children under 13 are already a protected category, so this changes nothing except that they will stop monitoring for topics, since it's already illegal to target individual children based on their cookie histories. 

Link to the FTC's NPRM when I can find it.


Posted to Advertising | FTC

Days to DTV transition

Change Congress


Archives

Subscribe in a reader