Re: New text Issue 25: Aggregated data: collection and use for audience measurement research

My thanks to Kathy Joe and the group for proposing this text concerning
"audience measurement research."

My post here is about process and not substance concerning the work of
Kathy and the group:

1. Our noon eastern call today will NOT seek to resolve the desirability
of including the proposed language in the spec.  This is complex new text
that will take time for people to absorb.

2. If Rigo is willing, I think it may be useful to pick up on the
suggestion, I think by Rob, of discussing this as a use case in Berlin
next week.

3. Depending on time, it may be possible for us to have time for Kathy to
present and explain the proposal today in the call. There may be time for
questions and initial reactions to the text.  The goal would be exploring
this proposal, rather than trying to come to any sort of decision in an
initial review.

Thank you,

Peter




Professor Peter P. Swire
C. William O'Neill Professor of Law
    Ohio State University
240.994.4142
www.peterswire.net





-----Original Message-----
From: Kathy Joe <kathy@esomar.org>
Date: Wednesday, March 6, 2013 7:34 AM
To: Peter Swire <peter@peterswire.net>, Justin  Brookman <justin@cdt.org>,
"public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
Subject: Fw: New text Issue 25: Aggregated data: collection and use for
audience measurement research

>Here below is the revised text for issue 25 discussed with Justin and
>others in the group with some modifications to take Justin's comments
>into account.
>
>Information may be collected to create statistical measures of the reach
>in relation to the total population, and frequency of exposure of the
>content to the online audience, including paid components of web pages.
>One such method is through using a panel of users who have affirmatively
>agreed to have their media consumption and web surfing behavior measured
>across sites.
>
>The panel output is calibrated by counting actual hits on tagged content
>and re-adjusting the results in order to ensure data produced from the
>panel accurately represents the whole audience. The counts must be
>pseudonomised. Counts are retained for sample, quality control, and
>auditing purposes during which time contractual measures must be in place
>to limit access to, and protect the data from other uses. A 53 week
>retention period is necessary so that month over month reports for a one
>year period may be re-run for quality checking purposes, after which the
>data must be de-identified. The counted data is largely collected on a
>first party basis, but to ensure complete representation, some will be
>third party placement. This collection tracks the content rather than
>involving the collection of a user's browser history.
>
>The purposes 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.
>
>Audience measurement data must be reported as aggregated information such
>that no recipient is able to build commercial profiles about particular
>individuals or devices.
>
>To clarify a comment from Justin about auditing, note that  audience
>measurement systems (whether TV, radio, print or online) are usually
>managed or monitored by an independent body as
>guarantee of accuracy with various stakeholders in a joint industry body
>defining what is needed to provide a robust and impartial system.
>
>MRC handles this in the US whilst the JICWEBs reporting standards of ABC
>handles this in the UK and AGMA  is the German audit body. Here is
>a longer list  
>http://www.i-jic.org/index.php?PHPSESSID=55143f172846ed39c7958cbeb837a85a
>and here is ABC  
>http://www.abc.org.uk/PageFiles/50/Web%20Traffic%20Audit%20Rules%20and%20G
>uidance%20Notes%20version2%20March%202013%20master.pdf
>
>Regards
>
>Kathy Joe
>ESOMAR
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 6 March 2013 13:38:03 UTC