Behavioral Targeting and the Privacy Debate

From credit card companies that rate based upon where you shop, to pay-per-click advertisements based upon Google searches, behavioral targeting has become an ubiquitous, if effective marketing tool. This issue has become a hot button topic for many publishers, advertisers, and privacy protection groups like the IAB and NAI. Even the FTC in Washington has taken an interest.

Critics are concerned whether or not behavioral tracking agencies are effectively disclosing how the targeting works, and whether or not they are offering consumers the ability to escape their radar by opting out of tracking. Despite numerous discussions on the regulation of behavioral marketing, no solution has been found that satisfies all parties.

Behavioral targeting agencies claim that their actions are legal, due to the privacy policy information located on websites. Most of them contain links that allow consumers to opt out of tracking. Sites like Bluekai and Google have listed ‘reference pages’ where web users can register in order to list what types of behavioral tracking they will allow. By far, the most common option is simply to list this in a site’s privacy policy. The problem is, this information is generally buried within the service provider’s site, where the likelihood of a consumer finding it is slim. A consumer purchasing goods on a retail site will have no way of knowing that the retail company provider may use their browsing history to target them with relevant ads on another site within the provider’s network. The only way for a consumer to track behavioral targeting advertisements is if the advertisers themselves disclose that information.

Until this point, privacy disclosure enforcement has fallen to the networks, behavioral marketing publishers, and providers. While some progressive efforts toward transparency have been made, there is still a long way to go. Advertisers, however, have not met any restrictions, while at the same time reaping an obvious benefit. It is long past the time for advertisers to disclose their behavioral marketing practices, and allow customers the option not to participate. There is a lot of debate on the most appropriate way to do this. Some options are to tag each ad with an opt out feature, or to place a disclaimer on the manufacturer’s page, with a full explanation.

There is still no solution on how the advertisers can best disclose this information.

One company, Fetchback, has asked advertisers to fully disclose tracking information in their privacy policy, and insists that they provide an opt-out link via NAI, so that consumers can choose not to participate in the retargeting network. This is a necessary step for all behavior marketing advertisers to take, in order to become more transparent. The behavior tracking industry will fare far better with self-regulation than it will with government regulation.