We are our own worst enemy …

Back in February of this year, in partnership with BPA Worldwide, Web Analytics Demystified published a white paper detailing the risks associated with the use of Flash Local Shared Objects (LSOs) in digital measurement. Titled “The Use of Flash Objects in Visitor Tracking: Brilliant Idea or Risky Business?” the paper drilled down into how some companies are using Flash LSOs and offered the following guidance:

Do not use Flash to reset browser cookies
Disclose the use of Local Shared Objects
Allow site visitors to disable Local Shared Objects

The first piece of advice turns out to be pretty important since companies are now being sued over their use of Flash to reset browser cookies. MTV, ESPN, MySpace, Hulu, ABC, NBC, Disney, and others are being dragged into a lawsuit based on their use of Quantcast and Clearspring who were identified by Soltani, et al. as using Flash LSO to reset deleted browser cookies. These lawsuits allege a “pattern of covert online surveillance” and seeks status as a class action lawsuit.

Yikes.

Fortunately for Adobe they do not seem to be one of the targets in these suits, which makes sense considering the position the company has taken regarding the use of Flash. In my interview with MeMe Rasmussen, Adobe’s Chief Privacy Officer back April of this year, Mrs. Rasmussen explicitly stated:

“… the position we outlined in the FTC Comment on condemning the misuse of local storage, was specific to the practice of restoring browser cookies without user knowledge and express consent. We believe that there are opportunities to provide value to our customers by combining Omniture solutions with Flash technology while honoring consumers’ privacy expectations.”

On the topic of consumer privacy and web analytics, following up my partner John’s response to the Wall Street Journal article on online privacy (“Be still my analytical heart”), I recently wrote a piece for Audience Development Magazine titled “You are all evil …” While a little tongue-in-cheek the article encourages marketers and business owners to:

Have a rock-solid privacy policy
Not use tracking software they don’t understand
Not be unaware of what tracking software they have deployed
Have a clear answer for “how and why do you track us?”
Be transparent as hell when anybody asks what you’re doing

As I reflect back on the guidance we have provided in the past year I run the risk of becoming quite depressed. None of our recommendations are surprising, revolutionary, or particularly Earth shattering … but not nearly enough companies are doing most of these very simple things. Given this, one possible outcome is becoming increasingly apparent …

We are going to get screwed.

Go back to Walt Mossberg’s 2005 assertion that “cookies are spyware” and the related conversation around cookie deletion and you will see a clear pattern: media (ostensibly acting in the best interest of consumers) points out that what we do is somehow devious … and we more or less ignore the problem, hoping it will go away.

My friend Bob Page once referred to something he called the “Data Chernobyl” … a unexpected and massive meltdown in consumer trust associated with the data that we collect, store, and use to make business decisions. When you think about it for just a little bit the idea is terrifying … because everything we do depends entirely on our ability to collect, store, and use information about consumer behavior on the Internet.

Our livelihoods depend on everyone ignoring the fact that we track, understanding why we track, or getting something tangible out of the tracking we do. Sadly we have never offered anything tangible, we have never really made an effort to explain what we do in court of public opinion, and it is increasingly clear that the bright light shining on our trade isn’t going to fade anytime soon.

What’s worse is that we are collecting even more information across mobile, social, and other emerging channels, perfecting our ability to integrate that data into over-arching consumer data warehouses, and occasionally using techniques that even the most hard-hearted of web analysts get all geeked-out about.

We have become our own worst enemy.

Now, as I declared in the Audience Development piece, I simply do not believe that consumers are as freaked out about tracking online as the media makes them out to be … the data I have seen just doesn’t support that conclusion. But consumers aren’t the real problem: the real problem: is the media, lawyers, and potentially the Federal Government. All three of these groups continue to generate page views, make money, and “protect the common man” (sic) by throwing our industry under the bus … and we aren’t doing anything in our defense.

Dumb, dumb, dumb.

People much smarter than I am have repeatedly stated that they don’t want to engage the media or “privacy police” in a conversation that they cannot possibly win. To a small extent this makes sense, but at some point I wonder if we are going to collectively end up looking like my four year old when he knows he’s made a mistake. My son gets away with it because he’s awesome cute and I love him, but I am beginning to think the collective web analytics industry is not going to get away with mumbling and making lame excuses for much longer.

The advertising industry has the IAB and NAI, both of whom appear to be responding to articles, lawsuits, and Congressional investigation on many of these issues. (If you haven’t seen it yet, have a look at this amazing “privacy matters” campaign the IAB is running.) But we are not the advertising industry, we are the web analytics and digital measurement industry, and we need to have our own voice, our own lobby, and our own representation.

Since the framework for this already exists, I am officially asking that the Web Analytics Association formalize and finalize their Industry Advocacy program and represent the digital measurement community in the forum of public opinion.

I have already volunteered to help with this effort under the Presidency of Alex Langshur and reiterate that commitment to the current Board of Directors. The WAA needs to bring together corporate members and key practitioner representatives to quickly hash out a clear, concise, and practical position on the relationship between digital measurement technology and consumers. The current WAA Board is in perhaps the best position in years to make the decision to represent the needs of our community … but decisive action is required.

Without the WAA’s leadership on this issue I fear that over time we will lose the battle of public opinion and my tongue in cheek assessment of the “evilness” of our industry will be far less funny than it seems today.

Let’s not let that happen.

We are an awesome industry full of brilliant people. The work we do is some of the most valuable but least understood in the interactive world. I believe it is time to come out of the closet, accurately describe the value of the work we do, and stop shying away from a conversation we feel is stacked against us and a battle we are unsure that we can win. If we don’t try, without a doubt, we will remain our own worst enemy.

Posted Sunday, August 29th, 2010 | 20 responses | Share, Save or Email

http://meb.tw/cCkDXk M. Edward (Ed) Borasky

Absolutely! That said, as a statistician, I think “web analytics” collects more data than we really need to assure profitability or even competitiveness.
http://a8llison.blogspot.com/ Allison Hartsoe

This is already an uphill battle. You mention Mossberg in 2005 and he was just reiterating what most Internet users already thought. To change minds, it will take more than the WAA saying “we agree with them”. A coordinated effort with the IAB, DMA, NAI and others is needed. Perhaps even call in PRSA. Thanks for the post.
http://www.emetrics.org Jim Sterne

Well said Eric. And now, given that the WAA is a member oriented, volunteer driven organization,
it’s my turn:

I am officially asking Eric Peterson to participate in the WAA’s advocacy initiative.

Please get in touch with Rachel Scotto and actively participate in keeping us from being our own worst enemy.
Michael Bain

The Mossberg argument/logic is fundamentally flawed, absurd. It’s akin to saying cameras cause pornography. The main problem is that the word “spyware” implies malicious intent, where intent good or bad is not established.

I think that the main focus for WAA needs to be to filling a notable standards void – establish a browser trust relation with a website… in the same way trusted keys SSL are enforced, the P3P and other internet standards can provided for cookies setting enforcement.
http://menggoh.com Meng Goh

WAA might be able to lead the way, but it’ll required many different parties in the WA industry to make this work. Vendors should be actively participating in bring awareness as well, many of them already have established relationship with securities software companies in order to protect their third party cookies. As web analytics professionals, we should actively educate ourselves and understand our company’s privacy policy. My previous marketing operation and analytics team for example has a “privacy champ” as single point of contact with our legal department dealing with any privacy issues and concern. For those higher in the food chain, you should think about bring this type of responsibilities within your web analytics team.
http://www.webanalyticsdemystified.com eric

Ed: Thanks for your comment, but it’s a little more nuanced than that. Turns out it’s not the data we collect (or the volume) it is how the data is put to use, and how that use is communicated.

Allison: Maybe, but I have the impression that the groups you mention are not impressed with the effort we have put up as a community. If that is correct, why would they want to work with us and further fragment their own message?

I could be wrong — and hopefully someone will correct me if that is the case — but I believe that either A) the WAA needs to step up or B) if they won’t, someone else does. Maybe a coalition of Demystified + Semphonic + Stratigent + ZAAZ would be the answer?

Jim: Great to hear from you! As you are hopefully aware I have been officially participating with the WAA on the Advocacy effort … but that effort has gone nowhere.

I love Rachel but like many of us she is really, really busy at her day job. When we engaged last time she finally admitted she was swamped, then Alex lost his post, and since then … nada. I’m cool with busy, I’m busy, you’re busy, we are all busy … but I see Advocacy as a pillar of what the WAA should be doing, don’t you?

What about this? Might Alex Yoder and/or Matt Langie be better leaders from the Board of Directors for Advocacy? These guys (especially Alex) have A TON invested in our industry not being a scapegoat, and at Webtrends they have had this experience before (Google “Webtrends Whitehouse cookie” for background). I would be absolutely delighted to work with one or both of these guys to build a WAA Advocacy effort that reflects the vendor perspective, the WAA mandate, and the practitioner position.

Can you ask Alex and Matt what they think? I don’t know if they read my blog …

Michael: Agree, Mossberg is making a crazy-man’s case here … but what is a crazy man with millions of readers? Yeah, a very influential crazy man.

I see the effort as even simpler than you describe: the WAA (and our industry) need to have a position and a voice in this conversation. We need to represent ourselves in the forum of public opinion as a group, not as individual points of light.

Meng: I don’t disagree with you … but if nobody leads, nobody will follow.
http://www.waomarketing.com/blog Jacques Warren

Gosh, I’d LOVE to see what credit card companies’ blogs have to say about this. The data we give them, as consumers, is SO much more invasive. I don’t know why the Web always gets all the attention. Maybe because we don’t *need* it as much as our beloved credit cards to which we signed off our souls.

I’m all with you here. We need to educate people. And maybe it’s time that, as consumers, we just simply admit to ourselves that we have been measured to the bones for decades, and get over it.
http://www.pentadanalytics.com Aaron Fossum

Eric, thanks for the Clarion call. As WSJ, NYT and other media alarmists are taking this panic to the mass market. It’s time for us to do the same.

Polls are showing that when asked directly if consumers are worried about privacy they say “very much so”. But when they are asked if they are willing to give some personal information to get a better online experience (recommendations, social, etc), they say “very willing” – especially millennials.

The disconnect shows just how much education is necessary right now.

For those in the Northwest, we’ll have a great opportunity to discuss privacy, advocacy and education at the WAA Symposium on September 13. http://bit.ly/8XRRf7
http://www.webtrends.com Alex Yoder

Hi Eric,

Of course I read your blog!

Thank you for your kind recognition. Yes, I m very interested in issues regarding privacy and the appropriate public education. I tweet and blog on the subject myself and have some fairly strong views on the subject http://blogs.webtrends.com/blog/2010/08/04/the-answer-is-the-domain-reaction-to-the-wsj-privacy-dust-up/

But my views are not alone. This is an important issue for the entire community and there are wide-ranging perspectives as to the appropriate policy statement. Rachel is the board’s chosen representative. The entire point of an Association is to have group consensus that is not driven by the private interests of an individual, corporation, or entity. As a responsible and respectful member of our community and the WAA Board, I would like to assure that I follow appropriate decorum when addressing this topic and work through board channels while I am in that capacity.

I can (and should) continue to have my own views, but those will not overrun the directive of the board when in a WAA forum. If you want to engage with me personally, you definitely have my number and I’m always available to you.

Best,

Alex
Judah

Nothing around Privacy has changed in this industry for many years. The Privacy issues are all still the same. And there’s a lot of talk, but very little action from anyone in the industry (other than your call to action, Eric). Especially the WAA. I see other organizations in which I have participated, primarily the IAB, take a much stronger stand. Perhaps they have larger coffers or more active members or are just better at getting stuff done or more vested interest.

I can (and have) waxed poetic all day about what we should do as an industry or practitioner (when I used to blog here and elsewhere). And to give the WAA some credit, it’s a lot harder to actually do something than it is to talk about something.

And that’s precisely where I see the WAA failing on the privacy issue. They aren’t talking about it or doing anything about it. You have my pals Jim and Alex both on the WAA Board saying two different things: 1) You help Eric and 2) We already have someone helping. With all due respect to the genial Jim and excellent Alex – get aligned! Use decorum, work through channels, show respect, be responsible, whatever it takes. Just do something (except talking about “Republics” that aren’t really republics and don’t exist anyway ;).

How about the WAA writing an open letter to US Reps Markey and Barton and answer the questions they have posed to the Internet industry as co-chairmen of the House Bi-Partisan Privacy Caucus. http://markey.house.gov/docs/letter_-_edge_providers_-_comcast_-_8-5-10.pdf

Or maybe offer to visit DC and speak with them directly. Just do something. Or have Eric do it. Or have me to do it. Or have both of us do it. Have John do it. Or have the three of us do it. Or have all of us do it. Just do something. Lead the way WAA!
http://www.webanalyticsdemystified.com eric

Jacques: Agree 100%, and I think you’re into the heart of the problem here … value exchange. Credit card companies get to keep reams of data about us because the provide the most valuable thing possible for many people: MONEY! The value exchange is totally brilliant, and if you don’t want the card companies to have your data … don’t use credit cards.

The problem we have is that we have no tangible value exchange. Consumers don’t get anything substantive from the work we do on behalf of our employers, clients, customers, etc. Yeah, yeah, yeah someone will say “better ad targeting” and “better web sites” but I sincerely, sincerely doubt that the average consumer sees those as valuable and “better” is intangible to say the least.

We need to educate people, but we also need to defend ourselves in the court of public opinion. That’s all I’m sayin’ …

Aaron: I’d love to see that data on consumers trading data for better experiences, can you email me that (or comment the link?) I’d love to discuss the topic at the WAA event in Seattle in September and I think John and I have enough latitude in our presentation to touch on the topic. Good idea!

Alex: Great to hear from you and certainly understand your position re: your role in WAA, etc. I didn’t mean to be disrespectful to Rachel Scotto at all and I am more than happy to continue working with her on the effort if she would like. All I was saying is that as CEO of one of the key vendors in the sector you would have more pull (and have more to gain/lose) than any number of consultants but I understand your point about decorum, etc. I suspect it is obvious to all involved that “decorum” is not one of my strengths when it comes to community needs and efforts.

;-)

Regardless of who among you leads the effort it is encouraging to know you are discussing it and that it is on your collective “list of things to do.” I look forward to hearing about your efforts and again am happy to help in any way I am able.

P.S. If you haven’t read it yet I strongly encourage you and the rest of the Board to have a look back at Bob Page’s clarion call to the WAA … from five years ago: http://bobpage.net/2007/04/26/web-analytics-ethics/

Judah: I’m not taking credit for the idea or the call to action; see Bob’s post from 2007 in my comment to Alex Yoder (above).

I think you might have misinterpreted either Alex or Jim’s comment. Jim has wisely said “get involved” (which I have been as much as there has been work to do) and Alex is saying “it’s Rachel’s baby, talk to Rachel.”

Your point about writing your congressman is spot on my friend. I envision a WAA Advocacy effort able to reach out to 1,700 members and get them to write a letter, make a phone call, comment on a blog post, scream and shout and carry on as if someone were trying to take away our livelihoods. When the WSJ piece was published I saw a bunch of folks I respect in the industry step up and comment — but there wasn’t cohesion in the response. The WAA (or someone) should be able to coordinate a cohesive response when we are maligned in the court of public opinion.

Anyway … thanks for your comment my friend.
http://homepage.ntlworld.com/adelie/stephen/ Stephen Turner

I think most people in this industry are so familiar with what we do, and convinced that it’s helpful to our customers, that we fail to realise what ordinary people would think of it. Frankly, I think many people would find what we do a bit creepy. And I think you’re spot on that “we have no tangible value exchange”. People are prepared to give up a lot of privacy if there is some perceived benefit. But if the benefit is a vague “improve commerce”, that’s not enough.

I’m not sure I see the way round this. The media and politicians will normally represent the views of the public, or focus on what makes the best story. Maybe regulatory bodies are the best target for advocacy.
http://www.pentadanalytics.com Aaron Fossum

Eric, it would be awesome if you could touch on privacy and advocacy in your presentation.

I love the phrase “tangible value exchange” and I think this is key to advocating for our industry. That value is provided in many cases, but still not enough.

On the positive side, eMarketer’s “Privacy Not a Problem for Savvy Millennials” mentions surveys that social networking users understand the privacy vs. participation tradeoff. It quotes polls from Harris and Pew. I think this is a move toward the “tangible value exchange” we need in order to make the case. http://www.emarketer.com/Article.aspx?R=1007887

However, the most thorough and fair treatment I have found on the issue is the U of Pennsylvania and Berkeley study published by the New York Times last year: http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/business/20090929-Tailored_Advertising.pdf. This survey shows a strong rejection by consumers, indicating that “better ad targeting” does not (currently) qualify as a “tangible value exchange”.

What I’m taking away from this is consumers want to be known but are afraid of being stalked.

It seems people understand and accept a privacy-for-value tradeoff with sites they trust (Facebook, for instance). But they want control of when and with whom they make that trade. This is why BT networks are particularly maligned by WSJ. It’s not just the breadth of coverage, it’s the loss of control over your own data.
Melaine

Eric thank you for this post, it is great to see interest in this issue. I agree in the importance of educating others on how valuable this data is and more importantly what we do with it.

I look forward to hearing about the next steps on how we can all get involved in fighting this fight.
http://www.webanalyticsdemystified.com eric

Dr. Turner: Agree fully. We see ourselves the way we perceive ourselves, but we are not the mirror we should be using. Alas, we have not developed the sophistication required to communicate with politicians, much less the general public.

Great to hear from you, BTW!!!

Aaron: I talked with John (my partner, who is also on the WAA Board) and assuming our hosts in Seattle don’t have a problem with it I think we might end up talking about the need for advocacy … stay tuned!

Melanie: I know (through the grapevine) that you folks at HuffPo are doing lots and lots with data and it is exactly your use of data and (honestly) your job that Advocacy would protect. Stay in touch and I look forward to connecting with you at the X Change!
http://www.socialsecurity.gov Tim Evans

>aren’t the real problem: the real problem: is the >media, lawyers, and potentially the Federal >Government.

Just a reminder we Feds now finally have the go-ahead for use of persistent cookies, subject to stringent requirements for content of our privacy statements. I know of at least one agency that’s gone forward in the last few days.
Chris G

The WAA is probably our only hope for any impact on this situation, long term, but it will take a lot more than a letter or an article. Considering the likely time frame and the slowness of committees and part-time attention, what might be needed is a dedicated person with at least a little experience in the policy arena (including both standards and regulations). There are enough consultants in our field that one of them might find this to be a really interesting one-year contract. Last I looked, WAA had some substantial funds and this could be the best use of those funds in WAA’s history.
http://www.webanalyticsdemystified.com eric

Tim: Definitely … but let me ask you this: Do you (or your peers) have any concerns that when folks see/realize that Federal Government sites are using Google Analytics they may have a negative reaction? The Consumer Watchdog group video making the rounds right now is certainly unnerving …

http://insidegoogle.com/2010/08/do-not-track-me/

Chris: Agree fully, at least about dedication, but I wonder how much the WAA might be able to do well before spending any money? To me it seems like there are a lot of little things that can be done from an advocacy standpoint … definitions, descriptions, focus. But very likely at some point this would be something that Mike Levin would also need to address.

Thanks to both of you for commenting!
Pingback: Web Analysts Code of Ethics … | Web Analytics Demystified
Pingback: FTC “Do Not Track?” Bring it on … | Web Analytics Demystified