Marketers should get ahead of Do-Not-Track
DM News reported recently that marketers opposed a Federal Trade Commission (FTC) proposal to implement an online "Do-Not-Track" option that would allow consumers to opt out of all third-party tracking and behaviorally-targeted advertising. This would enable consumers to universally opt-out of being tracked online or through any digital channels (presumably).
The marketers quoted in the article voiced opinions ranging from the thoughtful ("this will set back the online digital customer experience by five years") to the selfish ("..it would hurt our ability to get a complete picture"). THE FTC Chairman in proposing the move, predicted that it would be necessary if the industry did not do a better job of self-regulations. The DMA, predictably, denied that self-regulation was not working without actually providing any proof that it was. The DMA currently encourages its members to include opt out icons within their sites - much like unsubscribes on email, so that individual sites would stop tracking consumers.
The truth is that tracking and behaviorally targeted advertising does immensely improve the customer experience. This train has left the station but is also out of control and the FTC's proposal may be a wakeup call to the industry to take a hard look at how to balance the interests of marketers and customers, which may converge more than they realize. Most customers if they truly understood how it worked might initially be spooked but would probably gladly make the trade-off once they realized what they would lose by exposing themselves to the digital version of "junk" rather than targeted and relevant advertising. Yes, there would be a segment that would turn tracking off and let it stay off, but many would probably choose to turn on tracking for their favorite sites because they like those customized offers and pitches. Perhaps the industry should consider modifying a universal opt out with the ability of consumers to selectively opt-in? Or alternatively, to manage preference centers where consumers could indicate how and when they want to be tracked by different websites - a sort of clearing house? Now that would be a way for the DMA to make itself really useful to its members.
It seems that any discourse or dialog having to deal with government regulations quickly becomes adversarial. This might be an opportunity where there is an attractive middle ground between universal tracking and universal opt outs. If marketers don't get ahead of this, consumer fear of the privacy violations unmitigated by their knowledge of the benefits of tracking may well make onerous and burdensome regulations unavoidable. Then, both marketers and consumers will come to regret it. Only Luddites will win.
Leave Your Comment Comments
Thanks, Ram. That does sound like a much more practical approach. It gives consumers some measure of control, while making it easy for them to opt out if they want to and marketers will track when and where the can and still customize offers and experiences. A browser based policy is probably close enough, although I am sure plenty of people will find it insufficient.
My browser is resident on my smartphone, laptop, and desktops (yeah- those are still around at my home at least), and I think there's one on the Wii too.
With browser proliferation (wars), I dont recall how many browsers/versions/technologies are used & recycled on each of these gadgets .
I for one, will find a browser based opt-out approach a bit cumbersome.
Good point, Eashwer. Browsers are embedded in a lot of devices and a pure browser based approach will leave gaping holes in the visitor experience. Perhaps the browsers have to be able to share preference info for each visitor with the sites visited. If so, the site needs to be able to identify that visitor when he/she comes through another device or browser, which then means sharing some information. Paradoxically, the price for privacy (as well as personalization) may be the willingness to share more info. Interesting challenges.
Naras.
Excellent post. There are challenges on the online side on setting up opt-out policy like SPAM Compliance email policy because the online behavior is tied to the browser and the specific machine more than the individual consumer. Google and Firefox have proposed a browser header opting out mechanism that over time will turn out to be the way companies will need to adhere to the FTC policy. It offers the flexibility to personalize the sites where users want to be tracked.