Yesterday, Microsoft announced that that the latest version of its Windows 8 operating system has an Internet browser that has the “do not track” feature turned on as the default. This might seem like just a business choice, and one that is pro-privacy as well. But it’s not. This unilateral action will set back the cause of industry self-regulation, produce considerable consumer confusion and delay the introduction of an effective “do not track” feature.
The essential problem is that a “do not track” flag works only with the cooperation of websites and ad networks. If they do not honor the “do not track” setting in the consumer’s browser, the consumer will be tracked. But the industry has announced that they will cooperate with a “do not track” request only if it is an opt-in choice from the consumer himself, not a choice made on his behalf by a platform provider. If they stick to this position, the new “do not track” feature described in today’s announcement won’t in fact stop tracking.
And here’s where the consumer confusion comes in. Some reports say flatly “…when browsing on PCs and mobile devices featuring Windows 8, a user automatically won’t be tracked on the Web.” Well, that’s wrong, but most users will believe what they read and think they have successfully turned off advertising tracking by using the latest Windows operating system. It will take months to unwind this consumer confusion.
But why would the industry refuse to honor a consumer “do not track” request? Targeted ads are more effective and more valuable than regular ads. If regular ads replace all or most of the targeted ones, ad revenue declines dramatically. And the content that depends on ad revenue declines as well.
If ad networks and websites honored “do not track” requests that are on by default, they would be accepting a dramatic decline in their revenue. People rarely change a default setting unless they really care about something. Getting regular ads instead of targeted ones is not so intrusive, annoying or disturbing that people will go out of their way to change things. So if the default is set at “do not track” it will stay there.
Is that the right way to structure the consumer choice? No. Arranging the choice that way threatens the economic basis for Internet content for no good reason.
When people care about something, they will act, as they did in response to the FTC’s Do Not Call rule. That rule required consumers to affirmatively call or email the FTC to ask to be put on a Do Not Call list. Three quarters of all Americans have signed up for the registry accounting for over 200 million phone numbers. When they want something, people will take affirmative action to get it.
But it makes sense to see if they really want it, rather than making the decision for them. When the economic basis of Internet content is at risk this is the only sensible choice. Put “do not track” on the same track as Do Not Call – make it opt-in.
The way forward is for the industry to coalesce around an opt-in “do not track” mechanism. The advertising industry has already agreed to cooperate with that. The details have to be worked out, but the right direction is clear. Today’s announcement means that it will take longer for the industry to come to a real agreement on the topic. It is a detour that will only delay the arrival of an effective “do not track” mechanism.
Mark MacCarthy, Vice President, Public Policy at SIIA, directs SIIA’s public policy initiatives in the areas of intellectual property enforcement, information privacy, cybersecurity, cloud computing and the promotion of educational technology.