Favorite

Somebody's watching me 

On March 1 Google updated its privacy policy. Previously, it had more than 70 policies for its various services — Chrome, Gmail, Google+, Picasa, YouTube, etc. The new policy covers nearly all Google properties. In January, the company explained the forthcoming change on its Official Blog: "Our new Privacy Policy makes clear that, if you're signed in, we may combine information you've provided from one service with information from other services." The upshot? Fewer passwords to remember for you, and easier access for Google to glean information about you and use it to more precisely target you with ads. That didn't sit well with many Internet commentators. The tech blog Gizmodo Photoshopped sinister eyebrows onto photos of Google founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page to accompany the headline "Google's Broken Promise: The End of 'Don't Be Evil.' " The National Association of Attorneys General sent a strongly worded letter to Page, accusing Google of invading consumer privacy, signed by 36 attorneys general, including Arkansas Attorney General Dustin McDaniel.

For anyone who's followed the development of the Internet over the years, this is an old story. As Joseph Turrow notes in his new book "The Daily You," as early as 1995, Internet companies were hiring data firms to analyze their users — who they were, where they were coming from, what they were doing on the site and how long they stuck around. That data makes the web go. The more of it companies like Google gobble up about you, the more useful Google is to you as well as to advertisers.

Because monitoring happens almost entirely behind the scenes, we rarely think about it. Pulling back the curtain is seeing a blown-up image of the dust mites that cover everything in your house — a little unsettling. Using a free Mozilla plug-in called Collusion, The Atlantic's Alexis Madrigal recently offered a useful window into that typically invisible process. Over a 36-hour period of normal web surfing, he counted 105 companies that were tracking him, mostly through cookies and beacons, files that allow websites to keep track of users' browsing habits. Some of the companies Madrigal found were familiar names — Google, Microsoft — but most, he said, were smaller companies with names like Audience Science. Together, they represent a dizzying array of outfits that are trying, in one way or another, to more successfully sell you things. Some track our web movements so they can create detailed consumer profiles to sell to other marketers. Others target ads based on users' behavioral, demographic or geographic information.

The large majority of the companies tracking you, including Google, promise that the data they collect is anonymized, meaning your name is not attached to it. As many privacy experts have pointed out, however, it's not difficult to connect detailed, anonymized data with detailed personal data (maybe Acxiom would be willing to help). Many of the data miners, increasingly, offer a "do not track option." In the wake of the Obama administration's recently unveiled Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights, major browsers have also promised to implement "do not track" technology into their products. Still, as many experts have pointed out, the only way to truly escape the long reach of marketers is to go offline completely.

Beyond being creepy, the social consequences of highly detailed profiling is largely theoretical at this point. A pragmatist might argue that whatever privacy we're ceding is a reasonable exchange for a largely free Internet. Turrow worries about discrimination in situations where advertisers supply discounts to people based on their marketing profile and none to others. I'm worried about the power online marketers are accruing and how they might leverage it on publishers. Of, say, journalism. Increasingly, as Turrow details in "The Daily You," marketers are pushing publishers to provide targeted content to users to enhance the value of their ads. When, according to a recent Pew Study, for every $7 newspapers lose in print ad revenue only $1 of digital ad revenue is gained, it's not hard to imagine marketers putting the screws to publishers. If you ever visit the Arkansas Times and find an article on exfoliating tips next to ad for skin care and you have aging or otherwise imperfect skin, you'll know the end is near.

Favorite

From the ArkTimes store

Comments

Subscribe to this thread:

Add a comment

More by Lindsey Millar

  • The Guns and Taxes Edition

    Governor Hutchinson’s tax cut promises, guns, Medicaid and pharmacists and the Babe Bracket — all covered on this week's podcast.
    • Feb 16, 2018
  • Locked away and forgotten

    In 2017, teenagers committed to rehabilitative treatment at two South Arkansas juvenile lockups did not receive basic hygiene and clothing supplies and lived in wretched conditions.
    • Feb 14, 2018
  • The Dancin' with Bart Hester Edition

    A new lawsuit challenging the state’s photo ID law, Bart Hester vs. the humanities, signs of a threat to governors school, big bills for the state Supreme Court and Clarke Tucker making a run for Congress — all covered on this week's podcast.
    • Feb 9, 2018
  • More »

Most Shared

  • In the margins

    A rediscovered violin concerto brings an oft-forgotten composer into the limelight.
  • Donald Trump is historically unpopular — and not necessarily where you think

    My colleagues John Ray and Jesse Bacon and I estimate, in the first analysis of its kind for the 2018 election season, that the president's waning popularity isn't limited to coastal cities and states. The erosion of his electoral coalition has spread to The Natural State, extending far beyond the college towns and urban centers that voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016. From El Dorado to Sherwood, Fayetteville to Hot Springs, the president's approval rating is waning.
  • Arkansans join House vote to gut Americans with Disabilities Act

    Despite fierce protests from disabled people, the U.S. House voted today, mostly on party lines, to make it harder to sue businesses for violating the Americans with Disabilities Act. Of course Arkansas congressmen were on the wrong side.

Latest in Media

  • UA cozy with D-G columnist

    An interesting element of the ongoing story of budget problems in the University of Arkansas Advancement Division has been a divide in outlook in the pages of the state's dominant news medium, the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette.
    • Nov 21, 2013
  • Democrat-Gazette covers one of its own in story of reporter Cathy Frye's rescue

    The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette's reports on the rescue of its reporter Cathy Frye, who was missing for days in the hot scrubby desert that is Big Bend Ranch State Park, are gripping.
    • Oct 10, 2013
  • Hodge shares his OA vision

    Roger Hodge, the new editor of Oxford American magazine, talked about his rise at Harper's, his writing philosophy and his plans for the OA before a full crowd last Wednesday at the Clinton School.
    • Sep 26, 2012
  • More »

Event Calendar

« »

February

S M T W T F S
  1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28  

Most Recent Comments

  • Re: Out of control

    • Gene, the all wise one, needs to help us set some new rules. What if…

    • on February 18, 2018
  • Re: Out of control

    • And Olphart - hey, That is a witty reply - good for you!

    • on February 17, 2018
  • Re: Out of control

    • Oh for god's sake - read the play - just read the play before going…

    • on February 16, 2018
 

© 2018 Arkansas Times | 201 East Markham, Suite 200, Little Rock, AR 72201
Powered by Foundation