Comments on: Behavioral Targeting – Where’s the Fine Line?

By: Paul Barsch

Paul Barsch — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 16:59:39 +0000

Elena, thank you for commenting on this post. I’m unable to glean your POV from the CANOW post. Are you for completely banning behavioral targeting in all forms? If not, under what conditions would it be permissible?

By: Elena Perez

Elena Perez — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 15:49:56 +0000

If you wonder about how "innocent" online data could be accumulated and used against people, read "Little Brother" by Cory Doctorow. We just did a review of it at the CA NOW site: http://www.canow.org/canoworg/2008/08/if-you-care-abo.html

By: Paul Barsch

Paul Barsch — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 13:29:17 +0000

Ebay acct business, thanks for taking the time to post a comment. As you are well aware, freedoms aren’t really free – there will always be trade-offs and a constant push-pull between citizens and government. Continual vigilance is necessary ensure that fine line -wherever it is- doesn’t get crossed often.

By: Paul Barsch

Paul Barsch — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 13:24:53 +0000

Nick, you are right about the necessity of targeted ads on social networks. Just think, for example of the millions of dollars in infrastructure and IT personnel needed to keep Twitter up and functioning. Even then, as recent news reports will attest, best efforts fail. There’s no free lunch as you aptly point out.

By: ebay account business

ebay account business — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 13:18:18 +0000

I personally feel this is a sad step in a wrong direction. People deserve their privacy no matter what. Under the guise of fake terrorism, even small things like internet targeting can be magnified in the wrong direction. It starts small with harmless internet targeting, then soon enough it escelates.

By: Nick Stamoulis

Nick Stamoulis — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 02:12:06 +0000

This is definitely a gray area as they need to make money but without making the users feel spied on. It is quite strange to see the targeted ads grace our screens each and every time we log into the social networks — it’s eerie with what some of them come up with but we suppose it’s somewhat necessary to keep these networks we love so much online.

By: Paul Barsch

Paul Barsch — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 21:06:47 +0000

Dave, your hypothetical situation reminds me of the movie Minority Report. Great movie!
In a digital age, it’s a fact that on a computer we leave a digital trail wherever we go. Sometimes that information is used to our benefit, however there are other times when unchecked “progress” does more harm than good.
Personally, I believe there is much more potential benefit to consumers via behavioral targeting than big brother. But it’s a fine line to be sure.
The US congress is now actively concerned with how ISPs and internet companies collect data, how long that data is kept, use of that data, disclosure and user permissions (opt-in/out) are all part of the debate.
I appreciate your comments and thank you for joining the discussion!

By: Dave MacDonald

Dave MacDonald — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:37:56 +0000

Paul, Thanks, I agree with you. My point of view is strictly from the business side. As a US citizen I am increasingly more concerned with public data being used against the public.
I feel very strongly that laws need to limit how government agencies can use this data but it is incredibly tricky. The countries’ opinions can change dramatically …. ie. Elected Republicans pre 9/11 were worried about government invading privacy. Post 9/11 elected Republicans are for homeland security and unlawful wire taps. A 180-degree shift.
Let me ask your opinion about a hypothetical situation: The government tracks that a man buys a how-to assassination book from Amazon, a gun from his local gun store, and posts on a blog about how he hates a person (but never specifically threatens their life). Should the police react when all signs point to a crime about to be committed? And if they do act how can they intervene if he hasn’t yet broken a law? If they don’t act how can you justify that someone you don’t know died to protect your privacy?
But, as for business and marketing I’m fine with it as long as I don’t get anything from a gun company. Such material would be irrelevant to me because I don’t believe guns should be sold to the citizenry.

By: Paul Barsch

Paul Barsch — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:13:24 +0000

Follow Vic, you’ve taken a good first step by dialoging on the issue. The train has left the station, but where it’s final destination is yet to be determined. Engaging in the privacy debate helps shape the debate.
There is a fine line between benefit and big brother, and I’m still not quite sure we’ve found it…

By: Paul Barsch

Paul Barsch — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:10:49 +0000

Patricia, I appreciate that you’ve taken the time to comment on this post. Standardization is often a natural bi-product of legislation. I think we’ll see in the next year some standards proposed and adopted by internet providers/sites in an effort to head off legislation. Internet privacy is an issue that’s reaching critical mass.