W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-tracking@w3.org > March 2013

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

From: Kimon Zorbas <vp@iabeurope.eu>
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2013 00:14:31 +0000
To: Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org>, "public-tracking@w3.org" <public-tracking@w3.org>
CC: Rob van Eijk <rob@blaeu.com>, Kathy Joe <kathy@esomar.org>, "peter@peterswire.net" <peter@peterswire.net>, "justin@cdt.org" <justin@cdt.org>
Message-ID: <CD62DEE0.62146%vp@iabeurope.eu>
Rigo,

you may want to check out existing cookies deletion studies (that in my
view demonstrates that users aren't stupid and know how to deal with
privacy threats - politicians just don't sometimes..). See e.g. Comscore
studies in US and UK (those I know of). The problem you seem to see in the
horizon exists.

Now, I am very surprised we get hooked up on audience measurement. To say
the least. I feel this group sometimes looses focus and a feeling for the
importance -and real or perceived threats- of certain data processing.

And in doing so, my and many other people's patience gets seriously
challenged. If we want to come to a meaningful standard, we should really
focus on defining tracking and maybe we find out that audience measurement
has not much to do with tracking.

Kind regards,
Kimon

Kimon Zorbas
Vice President IAB Europe



On 10/03/13 20:39, "Rigo Wenning" <rigo@w3.org> wrote:

>Kathy, Rob, 
>
>thanks for the discussion so far.
>
>On Saturday 09 March 2013 13:53:48 Rob van Eijk wrote:
>> Because these metrics are about users instead of usage, DNT must be
>> meaningful. 
>
>It burns down to whether the outreach measurement can continue without
>change in implementation. It looks like the hope is that DNT will go
>away without need for a change even in the presence of DNT:1. For the
>moment, I see lawyer-argumentation: "See, we do something super
>important and not evil at all that should just continue under DNT:1".
>
>By doing so, they collect information that citizens are not even willing
>to let governments collect in Europe (non issue in the US anyway because
>of the first party measurement possibility). We had large demonstrations
>on data retention.
>
>Question is when do the market researchers feel a pain point and
>acknowledge that they need to do something in their technology.
>
>I think this pain point will arrive when the metrics get really really
>unreliable because people block all the measureIDs and cookies and
>things. The challenge for us is that, today, nobody seems to believe
>that this point will come and thus no reason for investment.
>
>This leaves us with a power-relation that is either settled in talks or
>in courts. I would prefer talks. Perhaps we can still find a way to make
>important outreach measurement happen in a way that is acceptable to
>more privacy oriented people. And the market researchers may want to
>come up with a story on how do they want to react on DNT:1. "Not at all"
>is not a very satisfactory answer. But leaving them alone with the prob
>is not fair either. So I suggest to explore the stakeholders'
>willingness to brainstorm.
>
> --Rigo
>
Received on Monday, 11 March 2013 00:15:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Friday, 3 November 2017 21:45:07 UTC