The degree of privacy when surfing the Internet is an ongoing issue as companies endeavor to gather information on consumer activity. Many people who are web browsing may be unaware how closely they can be monitored, including sites sharing data among themselves, often for targeted advertising.
Curtailing the practice of online behavioral tracking for advertising purposes may take more than the public simply opting out of having tracking systems follow and collect their online searching.
“Consumers Union regulatory counsel Ioana Rusu says companies can not only find out who you are and where you’ve been, but also alter offers that you see based on nothing other than the website you’ve visited--something that can paint a grossly distorted picture of someone,” Reuters Money said in “Online privacy leaks worsen: ‘Do not Track’ gains steam,” October 11, 2011.
Data collection triggered by website activity
The accumulation of data can be triggered merely by signing up on a website or by viewing an ad on a site. Tracking cookies that may be activated during web browsing can report information to marketers who then develop a profile of online activity.
Through some systems it is possible to set browser privacy to not wanting to be tracked. Such tools are available through Mozilla Firefox, Microsoft Internet Explorer 9, and Apple Safari, though not Google Chrome.
The Federal Trade Commission has favored a do-not-track option to give consumers some say on how their personal information is collected and used. Although some agency officials are leery of the possible motivations browser firms may have in facilitating limits on behavior tracking. One of those concerns is that companies might try to prevent rival competitors from gaining information that could prove useful in the marketplace.
Michael Bologna in “FTC Commissioner Rosch Skeptical of Self-Regulatory No-Track Efforts” in Daily Report for Executives October 18, 2011, reported one official’s reluctance about having a blanket opt-out. Speaking before a Loyola University School of Law conference of antitrust attorneys in Chicago, Federal Trade Commissioner J. Thomas Rosch said the industry-sponsored do-not-track tools offer only limited protections.
Limits as to extent of opt-out functions
“Rosch said some of these mechanisms permit consumers to only opt out of behavioral advertising, but not all tracking. The mechanisms fail to alert consumers to this fundamental flaw.”
At the same time, the commissioner thinks an across-the-board opt-out could restrict free online content and result in “more obtrusive advertising,” Bologna wrote.
Members of Congress have proposed do-not-track measures as part of privacy legislation to let consumers opt out of data collection, though the recent bills introduced show some deference to industry fears over restricting online advertising.
A study by graduate student Jonathan Mayer of Stanford University’s Computer Security Laboratory found internet information collection from websites is not done as anonymously as some might think because it involves sharing of consumer user names and IDs.
Among sites where data gathered has gone are Google’s DoubleClick, Facebook, comScore, and Quantcast.
Consumers provide personal data as companies compile profiles
Writing about the Stanford study in “Website research finds online data ‘leakage’” in the October 11, 2011 Seattle Times, Mike Swift said: “[It found b]y signing in to many of the Web’s most popular sites, consumers send their names, email addresses or other personal information to other websites and data-collection companies.”
Some of the information sent included age, gender, zip code, or even relationship status. Specific sites maintain they do not share personal information, but Mayer has disputed the accuracy of such claims in several instances.
For his study, Mayer examined the top 250 high-traffic websites and signed up as a member of 185. In targeted advertising, companies can track consumers’ past actions online and the related probability of their future actions, Mayer noted.
“Senior Analyst Daniel Castro of the Information technology and Innovation Foundation dismissed Mayer’s study as alarmist,” Juliana Gruenwald said in “Privacy groups hoping Stanford study prompts action,” in Nextgov, October 12, 2011. “‘Internet users have more tools to protect their online privacy today than they had a decade ago, and the private sector is working diligently to strengthen and improve online advertising self-regulation,’ Castro said in a statement.”
While many privacy advocates believe consumers should be clearly informed as to what is being gathered on them, this subject is also being approached another way. Some online observers think instead of placing the onus on consumers to know the data being collected, more emphasis must be on what industry should do and if certain information should be gathered.
Online behavioral tracking can be done for different purposes with firms’ ability to collect, analyze, and retain data for the profiling of individuals. Consequently, companies may have an even stronger obligation to gather information only for legitimate business needs.
Sources:
- Reuters Money, “Online privacy leaks worsen: ‘Do not Track’ gains steam,” October 11, 2011
- Michael Bologna, “FTC Commissioner Rosch Skeptical of Self-Regulatory No Track Efforts, Daily Report for Executives, October 18, 2011
- Mike Swift, “Website research finds online data ‘leakage’,” Seattle Times, October 11, 2011
- Juliana Gruenwald, “Privacy groups hoping Stanford study prompts action,” Nextgov, October 12, 2011
John Seidenberg - John Seidenberg has worked on newspapers, newsletters, radio news, and produced specialized news publications as well as freelance ...
