- From: Jeffrey Chester <jeff@democraticmedia.org>
- Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2012 19:41:25 -0500
- To: "Jules Polonetsky" <julespol@futureofprivacy.org>
- Cc: "'Alan Chapell'" <achapell@chapellassociates.com>, <public-tracking@w3.org>
- Message-id: <8FE42C12-4E5D-4D9F-AE93-AA4D75847FAD@democraticmedia.org>
It's a panel, which is distinct from user impact/expectations. That is covered by research issue. On Feb 8, 2012, at 6:24 PM, Jules Polonetsky wrote: > Here is a current example of users being paid for tracking > > http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/08/google-screenwise-project_n_1263128.html?ref=tw > > From: Alan Chapell [mailto:achapell@chapellassociates.com] > Sent: Wednesday, February 08, 2012 3:59 PM > To: Jeffrey Chester > Cc: public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org) > Subject: Re: Issue 115, exemptions, best practices > > Jeff - > > If we're starting with the premise that any attempt to get a User to agree to an exemption is undermining User intent, we're going to have trouble finding common ground. Are there ANY mechanisms for providing a reward for the User's agreement to an exemption that are acceptable to you? What about providing additional free content in exchange for an exemption? Is that ok? > > > Cheers, > > Alan Chapell > Chapell & Associates > 917 318 8440 > > > From: Jeffrey Chester <jeff@democraticmedia.org> > Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2012 15:50:09 -0500 > To: Alan Chapell <achapell@chapellassociates.com> > Cc: "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org> > Subject: Re: Issue 115, exemptions, best practices > > Alan: As you know, online marketing practices are designed to process users to agree to opt-in and data practices. What I wrote below are just a few of the practices used by the leading co's and many others. If a users decision on DNT is not to be undermined, we must ensure that practices are incorporated the permit fair user choice. > > > > > Jeffrey Chester > Center for Digital Democracy > 1621 Connecticut Ave, NW, Suite 550 > Washington, DC 20009 > www.democraticmedia.org > www.digitalads.org > 202-986-2220 > > On Feb 8, 2012, at 3:23 PM, Alan Chapell wrote: > > > Jeff – In looking at what you've provided here, I'm a bit concerned that you are dictating the terms that a website has with its visitors. Can you share the rationale for each of these – and specifically, what you are trying to guard against? > > Alternatively, I'm happy to have a one-off discussion on this topic on Friday early AM with Ninja and Jim. > > > Cheers, > > Alan Chapell > Chapell & Associates > 917 318 8440 > > > From: Jeffrey Chester <jeff@democraticmedia.org> > Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2012 14:05:40 -0500 > To: "public-tracking@w3.org (public-tracking@w3.org)" <public-tracking@w3.org> > Subject: Issue 115, exemptions, best practices > Resent-From: <public-tracking@w3.org> > Resent-Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2012 20:08:56 +0000 > > https://www.w3.org/2011/tracking-protection/track/issues/115 > > [I await input from Ninja, Alan and Jim] > > > > Best Practices for sites to manage exemptions should include: > > A site must provide accurate information to users on the actual data collection and use practices of the site. This should include all information used for tracking, targeting, sales of profiles. > A site should not suggest that the ability to access information is dependent on blanket acceptance of a site's data practices. > A site should not use "immersive" multimedia applications designed to foster opt-in as a way to encourage a user agreeing to an exemption. > A site should not use a special landing page that has been designed principally to convert a user to agree to permit an exemption. > A site should not use social media marketing to urge a user to ask their "friends" to approve exemptions. > A site should not offer rewards and incentives for a user to approve of an exemption. >
Received on Thursday, 9 February 2012 00:42:20 UTC