ISSUE-25 re 5.2 Audience measurement: ACTION 415 June change proposal:

Dear All,


Over the last few weeks as agreed by the group, we have had several calls including Susan Israel, Richard Weaver, Adam Philips as well as Peter Swire with Rigo, Justin and Jeff - the wiki http://www.w3.org/wiki/Privacy/TPWG/Change_Proposal_Audience_Measurement is not yet updated to cover these exchanges including


* The mail from Rigo withdrawing his suggestion following my note to the group with a clarification
* The most recent submission following our call with Justin with additional wording on 'pseudonyized' . It also includes clarification on the purpose of AMR (see attached, text in red is new text not in the wiki version)
* A note to Jeff Chester clarifying part of the non normative text
I attach the email string below in advance of our call later today


Best regards


Kathy Joe





From: Rob van Eijk [mailto:rob@blaeu.com]
To: Rigo Wenning [mailto:rigo@w3.org], jeff@democraticmedia.org, Kathy Joe [mailto:kathy@esomar.org], Susan_Israel@Comcast.com [mailto:Susan_Israel@comcast.com], Richard Weaver [mailto:rweaver@comscore.com], Adam I.C. Phillips Phillips [mailto:adam.phillips@realresearch.co.uk], Peter Swire [mailto:peter@peterswire.net]
Cc: Mailing List [mailto:public-tracking@w3.org]
Sent: Wed, 03 Jul 2013 09:21:04 +0100
Subject: Re: ISSUE 25: ACTION 415: Audience measurement research


Peter,

After talking to Rigo last night, I see the progress on the normative 
language and specifically in purpose limitation and not applying the 
audience measurement data to individuals, a computer of device. I see 
the right mindset in terms of privicy by design: changing data from a 
site visitor into data about a site object.

Since we are negotiating here: if Audience Measurement becomes a 
permitted use, than Shane's proposal to allow the collection of intrest 
categories before de-identification needs to go off the table.

Rob

Rigo Wenning schreef op 2013-07-02 19:27:
> Dear all,
> 
> based on the text attached at the end of this email, that I received
> today from Kathy, and that was discussed during a call today, I 
> withdraw
> my requirement for a minimum bucket size of 812 people. I support the
> new text suggested as attached:

> On Tuesday 02 July 2013 18:05:28 Kathy Joe wrote:>> Following up on this action, as part of a series of calls, the two
>> most recent amendments to the normative text were discussed today in
>> a call with Rigo Wenning, Susan Israel, Richard Weaver and Adam
>> Phillips where it was clarified:
>> 
>> Calibrate, validate or calculate through¹ Susan noted this was added
>> to more clearly express that the panel data is used to better
>> understand the census data, in addition to the census data being used
>> to calibrate the panel data so that each informs the other. This does
>> not radically change the process - it just describes it more clearly.
>> 
>> Must not be used for any other independent purposes including
>> changing an individual¹s user experience or building a profile for ad
>> targeting purposes¹. This had already been added to cover concerns
>> like those that have been expressed on the list by Rigo and Jeff
>> Chester, which Rigo further explained to us on the call -- that an
>> audience measurement research permitted use would allow data to be
>> collected and used for another purpose, ie to change a piece of
>> advertising inflight or for addressability to particular, small
>> target groups based on user profiles, with the potential for abuse,
>> such as through redlining or offering different prices to users with
>> different profiles. This is not the purpose of, and is excluded from
>> the AMR permitted use, which is to provide a general measurement of
>> an audience (ie the number of viewers and general characteristics of
>> the audience that saw a piece of content). The only use of AMR to
>> determine any pricing would be that a web site owner could charge an
>> advertiser or media buyer a higher rate based on traffic to a
>> website.
>> 
>> Comments are welcome and we will arrange additional calls with Justin
>> Brookman and Jeff Chester.

From: Kathy Joe [mailto:kathy@esomar.org]To: Justin@cdt.org [mailto:Justin@cdt.org], Peter Swire [mailto:peter@peterswire.net], Israel, Susan [mailto:Susan_Israel@Comcast.com], Adam Phillips [mailto:adam.phillips@realresearch.co.uk]
Cc: public-tracking@w3.org [mailto:public-tracking@w3.org]
Sent: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 15:51:48 +0100
Subject: ISSUE-25 re 5.2 Audience measurement: ACTION 415 June change  proposal:





Dear All,

 

In a call last week between Justin Brookman, Peter  Swire, Adam Phillips and myself, we discussed audience measurement research and as agreed, here is our proposal  (new text in red) drafted to clarify the principle of ‘pseudonymized’ in  the normative section, without going into technical detail.

 

“A third party eligible for an audience measurement  research permitted use MUST adhere to the  following restrictions. The data collected by the third party: 

 

Must be pseudonymized before  statistical analysis begins, such that unique key-coded data are used to  distinguish one individual from another without identifying them.”

 

I attach Issue 25 with the new text inserted.




Susan Israel, Jeff Chester and I have a call scheduled today.




Time permitting, we hope that the amended text can be tabled in tomorrow's call.

 



Kathy Joe,







Director, International Standards and Public Affairs
    _____  

From: Kathy Joe [mailto:kathy@esomar.org]
To: jeff@democraticmedia.org, Susan_Israel@Comcast.com
Cc: peter@peterswire.net, public-tracking@w3.org
Sent: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 11:30:53 +0100
Subject: ISSUE-25 re 5.2 Audience measurement: ACTION 415 June change proposal:



Dear All,



In a call between Susan Israel, Jeff Chester and myself yesterday, Jeff asked what is meant by ‘optimizing content and placement on an individual site’ in the non normative text:

"The purposes of audience measurement research must be limited to:

·    Facilitating online media valuation, planning and buying via accurate and reliable audience measurement.

·    Optimizing content and placement on an individual site.



The term “audience measurement research” does not include sales, promotional, or marketing activities directed at a specific computer or device.  Audience measurement data must be reported as aggregated information such that no recipient is able to build commercial profiles about particular individuals or devices."



It was clarified that parallel to print media, AMR can support decisions of advertising placement eg should you place your ad in the front, back or close to certain content in a magazine. I should add that this is with a digital twist as there's no guarantee that the full text is rendered to the digital reader - so measuring what content or portions of web pages, including advertising placements, are actually displayed as well as the preferred placement areas, are all aspects of audience measurement.



It would also include elements about presentation, eg size, shape or color of background etc.

The overall purpose is to ensure that advertisements can be seen by the maximum proportion of the relevant audience, and to improve other aspects of the presentation associated with the viewership.

Regards




Kathy Joe
  














Atlas Arena, 5th floor
Hoogoorddreef 5
1101 BA Amsterdam
The Netherlands
Tel: +31 20 664 2141


www.esomar.orgThis e-mail message including any attachment(s) is intended for the addressee only and may be confidential. If you are not the intended addressee, we request that you notify us immediately and delete this e-mail including any attachment(s), without copying, forwarding, disclosing or using this (these) in any other way.



ESOMAR, the World Association for Social, Opinion and Market Research, is the essential organisation for encouraging, advancing and elevating market research worldwide.