USA Today recently leaked a project in development at Google
to replace cookies with “individual anonymous identifiers.” On the surface,
this sounds like a no-brainer: cookies have increasingly been viewed as
invasions of privacy, and browsers come equipped with settings to block them.
Google’s development, however, is now being scrutinized further and viewed in
light of its ramifications across the online spectrum.
Essentially, an anonymous identifier roll-out would assign a
number to each user, and hopefully connect that user across all relevant
platforms (i.e. mobile, tablet, desktop, laptop, etc.) that the user accesses.
This would present a windfall of data to potential advertisers who could
establish a fuller picture of each user they target; currently, cookies cannot
be tracked on mobile, which represents a significantly greater percentage of
overall web browsing. The issue at hand then, is whether the privacy invasion
outweighs the benefits to users. Though invasive ads are considered
frustrating, it can be pleasant to come across a digital ad for a product or
service that a consumer has been looking for. Ads will become increasingly
relevant—and potentially increasingly helpful—as they are able to better target
our wants and needs. If Google’s new model is eventually blocked by regulators
citing privacy concerns, the advertising market will be much less efficient
(i.e. wasting marketing spend on uninterested users) and consumers will
continue to be inundated with ads that are frustratingly irrelevant.
There is no clear answer at the moment, but the next several
years of developments in this space will be telling, and will either
revolutionize digital advertising, or inhibit its usefulness and send it back
several years. Ultimately, each consumer should mentally weigh the pros and
cons between the mutual exclusivity of convenience and privacy.
No comments:
Post a Comment