Blogs
Behavioural Advertising Policy: The Regulatory Future of Online Advertising
30 Mar 2011
Behavioural Advertising Policy: The Regulatory Future of Online Advertising
*** This blog post is taken from the IIEA's March 2010 Digital Policy Newsletter available here ***
Behavioural Advertising is the collection of user data for advertising purposes. Behavioural targeting uses information collected on an individual's web-browsing behaviour, such as the pages they have visited or the searches they have made, to target them for future advertisements. This can be combined with other factors such as demography, page content and geography in order to maximise effect.
The European Parliament Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection has published a report, authored by Philippe Juvin, MEP, who has suggested a range of measures to deal with this issue. The key regulatory issue is the balance between granting the user free access to online content and the use of personal data gleaned by profiling.
The report proposes that all behavioural advertising that is targeted at children be banned (this call was echoed by the European Data Protection Supervisor in an opinion issued this month) . It also proposes that all behavioural advertisements should have a clear icon stating “behavioural advertising”, linked to a page which explains what it is. Furthermore, it encourages an EU-wide information campaign designed to highlight the issues for consumers and encourage awareness.
One type of behavioural advertising utilises cookies in order to function. (Cookies are pieces of data created when someone visits a website and contain a unique number which is stored in the hard disc of the computer, revealing when they return to a website and what pages or services they use). The EU’s ePrivacy Directive had previously, in 2009, set out the rules for cookies and their usage. However, the Commission has indicated in the European Commission strategy on Data Protection that they are re-considering this position.
As many users consent to the utilisation of their data for behavioural advertising, the scope of the Communities powers in this area is limited. However, the consent is often elicited through the terms and conditions at the beginning of the online registration process, when it is suggested that many people are not fully aware of the contract they are signing. The awareness campaign, combined with the icon, represent an attempt by the Commission to increase awareness of the issue in the public consciousness and alter the behaviour of users accordingly.
It is possible these measures will gain significant public support considering that the majority of people polled in a recent Zogby poll indicated that they are ‘very concerned’ with behavioural advertising. Increased awareness of the extent of it may lead to a stronger public backlash against its use by advertisers. Furthermore, 77% stated that they would support a “Do Not Track” list, an option proposed in the United States by the Federal Trade Commission, which would allow users to opt out of behavioural advertising.
Behavioural advertising, compared to traditional forms of advertising, is understandably popular with advertisers. As a result, many of the organisations which utilise behavioural advertising operate on a freemium model, whereby the services are provided free of charge to the user and funded by advertising sales. Restrictions on these practices could result in a reduction of the freemium services offered. The extent to which users would be willing to give up their free services in order to prevent behavioural advertising is unclear.
In contrast to other Internet companies which utilise behavioural advertising, Google has taken a leading role in allowing users to exercise control over which data is held by the company. With products like Google Dashboard, it is possible for users to see all data which is held on them by Google, and the user is allowed to clear all data whenever he/she wishes. Unlike social networks such as Facebook, it is still possible to use Google products and not store data, which could be used for behavioural advertising.
This content forms part of the E View project, which is part-funded
by DG Communication of the European Parliament.
As an independent forum, the Institute does not express any opinions of its own. The views expressed in the article are the sole responsibility of the author.
Tags:
Posted in: E View Project, Digital Future | 1 comment
RSS
Latest Entries
- Red Herrings vs. Reality - The Stability Treaty
- Oireachtas Committee on Stability Treaty Releases Report
- The Court of Justice of the EU. What's their role?
- The EU in Twenty Years Time
Sort by Theme
- All themes
- Economics and Finance
- Future of Europe
- Justice & Law
- Energy and Climate Change
- Digital Future
- Foreign and Defence Policy
- The Wider Europe
- E View Project
- China
Sort by Authors
- All authors
- Brendan Halligan
- Cathy Cullen
- David Walker
- Gina Hanrahan
- IIEA
- James Kilcourse
- Jill Farrelly
- Johnny Ryan
- Joseph Curtin
- Keith Doyle
- Kevin Leydon
- Linda Barry
- Oisín Gilmore
- Pat McArdle
- Peadar o Broin
- Prof. Karl Whelan
- Shane Fitzgerald
- Tony Brown
- Tony Kinsella
Sort by Tags
Search Blog Archive
- All entries
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- March 2009
- May 2008

Comments 1-1 of 1
That's potentially what is at part if the Obama administration and advocates of stepped-up regulation of online advertising get their way. <a href="http://www.canberraonlinemarketing.com/">"Social Media Marketing for Local Business."</a>