NEARLY THREE OUT OF 10 online consumers--27 percent--use anti-spyware software to erase cookies weekly, according to a new report based on a survey of 800 online consumers by Horizon Interactive and InsightExpress.
Cookies have taken center stage in the online ad industry since last March, when Jupiter Research shocked many with a report revealing that that 39 percent of consumers delete cookies at least monthly.
The Horizon study, scheduled for release this week, found that 70 percent of consumers use some form of anti-spyware software. Of that group, 79.5 report running anti-spyware programs at least once a week and almost half, 48.3 percent, use the programs to delete cookies.
Separately, InsightExpress said last week that its research showed that that "the deletion of cookies [is] greatly exaggerated." InsightExpress reached that conclusion after asking respondents if they would be willing to delete cookies; half said they were, but only 35 percent of that group successfully did so.
Friday, April 29, 2005
Girl Scouts sue deadbeat cookie buyers
By Associated Press Posted April 29 2005
WAUKESHA, Wis. -- Girl Scout cookies aren't free, as a few alleged deadbeats are about to find out. One scout group has filed small-claims lawsuits against people who failed to pay up.
Christine Slowinski, communications director for the Girl Scouts' Great Blue Heron Council, said the legal action Thursday came only after several efforts to collect the money from sales of cookies in the annual fund-raising campaign over the past two years.
The amounts owed by two couples and three other women ranged from $301.42 to $1,485.68.
"We call many times before taking this step," Slowinski said. "We send them letters. When all else fails, this is our last resort."
Form letters that preceded the legal action read, "Please note that nonpayment for Girl Scout cookies represents fraud," and advised the non-payers to arrange a repayment plan
WAUKESHA, Wis. -- Girl Scout cookies aren't free, as a few alleged deadbeats are about to find out. One scout group has filed small-claims lawsuits against people who failed to pay up.
Christine Slowinski, communications director for the Girl Scouts' Great Blue Heron Council, said the legal action Thursday came only after several efforts to collect the money from sales of cookies in the annual fund-raising campaign over the past two years.
The amounts owed by two couples and three other women ranged from $301.42 to $1,485.68.
"We call many times before taking this step," Slowinski said. "We send them letters. When all else fails, this is our last resort."
Form letters that preceded the legal action read, "Please note that nonpayment for Girl Scout cookies represents fraud," and advised the non-payers to arrange a repayment plan
Coalition Forms To Protect Cookies
A coalition of agencies, publishers and measurement firms hopes to head off a consumer revolt against Internet tracking cookies.
Safecount brings together online ad industry leaders to discuss steps to insure the reliability of cookies, which are used throughout Internet advertising for measurement, targeting, frequency capping and research. The group said it would work to safeguard consumer privacy while improving counting systems for advertisers. Surveys by Nielsen//Net-Ratings and Jupiter Research suggested over 40 percent of users delete cookies from their computers monthly.
"There are beneficial reasons for consumers to want to have these tools in place," said Cory Treffiletti, svp and managing director of Isobar's Carat Interactive, San Francisco. "We need to support the proper measurement and counting methods out there."
Much of the concern stems from spyware-removal software, which often identify Internet cookies as spyware. Treffiletti blames these companies for "preying on consumer fear" of identity theft. He said Safecount hopes to work with the firms to separate cookies from malicious tracking programs.
The group's 19 founding members include agencies Carat, Interpublic Group's Universal McCann, WPP Group's mOne and aQuantive's Avenue A/Razorfish; publishers like MSN and About.com; and research firms Dynamic Logic and Luntz Research.
Reports in March of the demise of cookies sent tremors through the online ad industry, since without them the Internet would lose its major advantage on many media: measurability. Though research released last week by aQuantive's research unit suggested the cookie surveys greatly exaggerated actual deletion, Nick Nyhan, CEO of Dynamic Logic, said they are a warning shot for advertisers as tracking spreads to other media.
"We want to provide a way for the industry as whole to learn and to come to some consensus," he said.
-- BRIAN MORRISSEY
Safecount brings together online ad industry leaders to discuss steps to insure the reliability of cookies, which are used throughout Internet advertising for measurement, targeting, frequency capping and research. The group said it would work to safeguard consumer privacy while improving counting systems for advertisers. Surveys by Nielsen//Net-Ratings and Jupiter Research suggested over 40 percent of users delete cookies from their computers monthly.
"There are beneficial reasons for consumers to want to have these tools in place," said Cory Treffiletti, svp and managing director of Isobar's Carat Interactive, San Francisco. "We need to support the proper measurement and counting methods out there."
Much of the concern stems from spyware-removal software, which often identify Internet cookies as spyware. Treffiletti blames these companies for "preying on consumer fear" of identity theft. He said Safecount hopes to work with the firms to separate cookies from malicious tracking programs.
The group's 19 founding members include agencies Carat, Interpublic Group's Universal McCann, WPP Group's mOne and aQuantive's Avenue A/Razorfish; publishers like MSN and About.com; and research firms Dynamic Logic and Luntz Research.
Reports in March of the demise of cookies sent tremors through the online ad industry, since without them the Internet would lose its major advantage on many media: measurability. Though research released last week by aQuantive's research unit suggested the cookie surveys greatly exaggerated actual deletion, Nick Nyhan, CEO of Dynamic Logic, said they are a warning shot for advertisers as tracking spreads to other media.
"We want to provide a way for the industry as whole to learn and to come to some consensus," he said.
-- BRIAN MORRISSEY
IAB Comes to Cookies' Defense
The Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) has begun an initiative to address cookie deletion and other issues related to the ubiquitous text files, ClickZ News has learned.
The industry group's efforts will begin with the formation of a cookie committee or task force, which has yet to be appointed, according to IAB President and CEO Greg Stuart.
"We don't know what it'll be called yet," Stuart said. "The first order of business is to collect those who care, who we've been talking to about this, and to get them together in a room and chart the course. There will be some sort of forum around cookies and cookie-related issues. We'll begin to identify different approaches."
He added that consumer education and policy initiatives are possible avenues for work. "There is a gap to be bridged. At the end of the day, cookies work for marketers, they work for publishers, and they work for consumers."
The move is at least partly a response to recent findings from JupiterResearch and other firms that as many as 33 percent of Internet users delete cookies weekly. However, Stuart said the seed of the idea goes back to late 2004, when the IAB's board gave it a mandate to get involved in policy issues. The main legislative concern at the time was a pending bill that was thought to endanger third-party cookies. Before the IAB got involved, however, a cookie exemption was added to the bill.
Though the danger represented by that particular bill has passed, Stuart said the IAB will address more policy issues going forward. He said this is partly because the industry is thriving and less in need of the proof of effectiveness that the IAB has focused upon the past.
"You'll see the IAB move more strongly into public policy and related issues that could negatively impact the business," he said.
News of the IAB's plans comes just two days after execs from Carat Interactive and Dynamic Logic teamed to launch Safecount, a coalition that will address marketer and consumer concerns around online measurement -- and cookies in particular.
Given all the buzz around the fate of cookies, one could easily forget it's only been six weeks since JupiterResearch released findings that nearly 40 percent of Internet users delete their cookies at least once a month. That report has been challenged on many fronts, but several follow-up surveys turned up similar results. An Atlas report released earlier this month at first appeared to contradict the results, but the company has since restated its findings to reflect cookie deletion rates even higher than Jupiter's.
The industry group's efforts will begin with the formation of a cookie committee or task force, which has yet to be appointed, according to IAB President and CEO Greg Stuart.
"We don't know what it'll be called yet," Stuart said. "The first order of business is to collect those who care, who we've been talking to about this, and to get them together in a room and chart the course. There will be some sort of forum around cookies and cookie-related issues. We'll begin to identify different approaches."
He added that consumer education and policy initiatives are possible avenues for work. "There is a gap to be bridged. At the end of the day, cookies work for marketers, they work for publishers, and they work for consumers."
The move is at least partly a response to recent findings from JupiterResearch and other firms that as many as 33 percent of Internet users delete cookies weekly. However, Stuart said the seed of the idea goes back to late 2004, when the IAB's board gave it a mandate to get involved in policy issues. The main legislative concern at the time was a pending bill that was thought to endanger third-party cookies. Before the IAB got involved, however, a cookie exemption was added to the bill.
Though the danger represented by that particular bill has passed, Stuart said the IAB will address more policy issues going forward. He said this is partly because the industry is thriving and less in need of the proof of effectiveness that the IAB has focused upon the past.
"You'll see the IAB move more strongly into public policy and related issues that could negatively impact the business," he said.
News of the IAB's plans comes just two days after execs from Carat Interactive and Dynamic Logic teamed to launch Safecount, a coalition that will address marketer and consumer concerns around online measurement -- and cookies in particular.
Given all the buzz around the fate of cookies, one could easily forget it's only been six weeks since JupiterResearch released findings that nearly 40 percent of Internet users delete their cookies at least once a month. That report has been challenged on many fronts, but several follow-up surveys turned up similar results. An Atlas report released earlier this month at first appeared to contradict the results, but the company has since restated its findings to reflect cookie deletion rates even higher than Jupiter's.
Wednesday, April 27, 2005
The Web: Search engine privacy threats
CHICAGO, April 27 (UPI) -- A new feature launched last week by Google.com, the Internet's most popular search engine, allows users to see all of their past searches, but privacy experts told UPI's The Web the service easily could be abused.
"People should review the site's privacy policy before using the service," said Tom Guida, an intellectual property attorney with Baker & Hostetler LLP in New York City.
The service, called My Search History, is similar to, but more comprehensive than, the feature Amazon.com, Ask Jeeves and America Online have offered for some time. It is intended to help people who use Google locate the information they sought during earlier searches so they can avoid repeating past queries.
"Ever find what you're looking for with Google, then promptly forget what you found?" the new feature asks users in an FAQ section on its site. "My Search History shows you all the searches you've done on Google and the search results you've clicked on, and presents this information in ways we think are most useful."
To set up the account, go to google.com/searchhistory. Once a user has done this, he or she will be able to see the search words previously entered -- for example, "Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger" -- as well as the sites visited previously that contain information on that search term. The hits are arranged chronologically, along with the times and dates of the searches.
"If you don't remember an exact search query, for instance, but do remember when you did the search, you can use My Search History's calendar feature to check the searches you did on a given day and navigate to any of them with a single click," the Google site says.
People also can do a full-text search over their entire search history.
"You can review everything Google has ever shown you about apples, bass fishing or 'The Wizard of Oz,' by clicking on the Related History link next to any search term when it appears," Google says.
This may sound interesting and useful, but computer experts said there are risks to privacy the technology has now generated.
"The main privacy concerns come down to two issues," said Tom Mighell, senior counsel with the Dallas law firm of Cowles & Thompson. "Allowing Google to store your search history on their computers -- this really depends on how you feel about other people storing your data."
Mighell noted a number of other sites online -- such as bookseller Amazon.com and eBay.com -- already store a lot of information about users on their computer servers.
"As long as Google holds up its end of the privacy policy, that information should remain safely on its servers," he said.
The privacy policy ensures the consumer's data will not be provided to third parties without the users consent, but it cannot prevent hackers from obtaining the data illicitly, or that police will not be able to obtain it with a warrant.
"A potentially more serious issue concerns computers that are used by more than one person," Mighell said. "To use My Search History, you have to be logged in. If you forget to log off, and someone else uses your computer, he is able to view your search history."
In industry argot, people will have to practice "good computer hygiene" to use this feature, he said. "Unfortunately, the average computer user doesn't have good computer hygiene, and expecting a higher level of awareness to use this service may be asking too much."
There are some built-in security features, though, which may help the average person: "The ability to remove any or all of your search history, or the ability to 'pause' collection of search history for an indefinite period of time," Mighell said, "but will people remember to use those features?"
Security expert R. David Lankes, an assistant professor at Syracuse University's School of Information Studies, said the developments at the search engines are akin to creating what he terms "search diaries" for users. He said one way to prevent anyone from learning someone else's search history is to create a fictional account name for Google that is not used for other sites.
"That isn't verified," Lankes added. "You can also delete accounts."
Google has run into questions about security before, when it launched its GMail service.
Despite the privacy issues, Lankes said, "(Google has) managed to build user trust, so I think this will continue to have a good impression among their users. As for embarrassment, better to look at what your browser holds on to. Most support auto-completes and search histories. This means someone can get a quick picture of what is being searched using that computer with no problems."
Some industry experts think the prospect of access to the personal search portfolio of every individual Internet user will be too tempting for marketers, who will press to develop new technologies tailored to those searches.
"I think it is interesting from an advertising standpoint -- that's the one thing that could be compelling," said Kelly Cutler, president of Marcel Media, an interactive advertising consulting company in Chicago. "The ability to alter the advertising message based on the individual's search history -- that's not available right now -- but eventually that could be the direction that they are going. That could be a way for advertisers to alter the message based on the preferences that the consumer has set up."
"People should review the site's privacy policy before using the service," said Tom Guida, an intellectual property attorney with Baker & Hostetler LLP in New York City.
The service, called My Search History, is similar to, but more comprehensive than, the feature Amazon.com, Ask Jeeves and America Online have offered for some time. It is intended to help people who use Google locate the information they sought during earlier searches so they can avoid repeating past queries.
"Ever find what you're looking for with Google, then promptly forget what you found?" the new feature asks users in an FAQ section on its site. "My Search History shows you all the searches you've done on Google and the search results you've clicked on, and presents this information in ways we think are most useful."
To set up the account, go to google.com/searchhistory. Once a user has done this, he or she will be able to see the search words previously entered -- for example, "Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger" -- as well as the sites visited previously that contain information on that search term. The hits are arranged chronologically, along with the times and dates of the searches.
"If you don't remember an exact search query, for instance, but do remember when you did the search, you can use My Search History's calendar feature to check the searches you did on a given day and navigate to any of them with a single click," the Google site says.
People also can do a full-text search over their entire search history.
"You can review everything Google has ever shown you about apples, bass fishing or 'The Wizard of Oz,' by clicking on the Related History link next to any search term when it appears," Google says.
This may sound interesting and useful, but computer experts said there are risks to privacy the technology has now generated.
"The main privacy concerns come down to two issues," said Tom Mighell, senior counsel with the Dallas law firm of Cowles & Thompson. "Allowing Google to store your search history on their computers -- this really depends on how you feel about other people storing your data."
Mighell noted a number of other sites online -- such as bookseller Amazon.com and eBay.com -- already store a lot of information about users on their computer servers.
"As long as Google holds up its end of the privacy policy, that information should remain safely on its servers," he said.
The privacy policy ensures the consumer's data will not be provided to third parties without the users consent, but it cannot prevent hackers from obtaining the data illicitly, or that police will not be able to obtain it with a warrant.
"A potentially more serious issue concerns computers that are used by more than one person," Mighell said. "To use My Search History, you have to be logged in. If you forget to log off, and someone else uses your computer, he is able to view your search history."
In industry argot, people will have to practice "good computer hygiene" to use this feature, he said. "Unfortunately, the average computer user doesn't have good computer hygiene, and expecting a higher level of awareness to use this service may be asking too much."
There are some built-in security features, though, which may help the average person: "The ability to remove any or all of your search history, or the ability to 'pause' collection of search history for an indefinite period of time," Mighell said, "but will people remember to use those features?"
Security expert R. David Lankes, an assistant professor at Syracuse University's School of Information Studies, said the developments at the search engines are akin to creating what he terms "search diaries" for users. He said one way to prevent anyone from learning someone else's search history is to create a fictional account name for Google that is not used for other sites.
"That isn't verified," Lankes added. "You can also delete accounts."
Google has run into questions about security before, when it launched its GMail service.
Despite the privacy issues, Lankes said, "(Google has) managed to build user trust, so I think this will continue to have a good impression among their users. As for embarrassment, better to look at what your browser holds on to. Most support auto-completes and search histories. This means someone can get a quick picture of what is being searched using that computer with no problems."
Some industry experts think the prospect of access to the personal search portfolio of every individual Internet user will be too tempting for marketers, who will press to develop new technologies tailored to those searches.
"I think it is interesting from an advertising standpoint -- that's the one thing that could be compelling," said Kelly Cutler, president of Marcel Media, an interactive advertising consulting company in Chicago. "The ability to alter the advertising message based on the individual's search history -- that's not available right now -- but eventually that could be the direction that they are going. That could be a way for advertisers to alter the message based on the preferences that the consumer has set up."
The Case of the Disappearing Cookies
Tiny files called "cookies" are the lifeblood of online advertising. Left on visitors' computers, they help Web sites track how many visitors they have, and how often they return — numbers crucial for determining the value of a site's ad space.
So advertisers got worried in 2000 when privacy advocates began denouncing cookies. Soon after, antispyware programs started identifying cookies and offering to delete them. In 2004, 18 percent of people who knew what cookies were said they deleted them very frequently, according to a study by Revenue Science, which helps advertisers find online audiences. A survey in December, 2005 reported a drop in that figure, to 8 percent.
But more recent studies have been less cheerful for advertisers. A February report by JupiterResearch found that 41 percent of male Internet users and 25 percent of women manually deleted cookies at least once a week. Those figures would be even higher if they included people who used antispyware programs to delete cookies automatically.
By ALEX MINDLIN
So advertisers got worried in 2000 when privacy advocates began denouncing cookies. Soon after, antispyware programs started identifying cookies and offering to delete them. In 2004, 18 percent of people who knew what cookies were said they deleted them very frequently, according to a study by Revenue Science, which helps advertisers find online audiences. A survey in December, 2005 reported a drop in that figure, to 8 percent.
But more recent studies have been less cheerful for advertisers. A February report by JupiterResearch found that 41 percent of male Internet users and 25 percent of women manually deleted cookies at least once a week. Those figures would be even higher if they included people who used antispyware programs to delete cookies automatically.
By ALEX MINDLIN
Tuesday, April 26, 2005
Cookies and Clutter
I would like to propose an equation for your review...
Advertising - Cookies = Clutter
If you read my column regularly, you'll note that one of my favorite topics of discussion is clutter. Our world is becoming increasingly cluttered and it's only going to get worse. The more the consumer becomes immunized and unresponsive to established forms of advertising, the more we find innovative, ingenious ways to speak to them and convey the messages of our brands. Hopefully these messages are targeted to the consumers we want to speak to and we avoid disturbing those consumers who show no interest.
The current discussion around cookie deletion is frightening because the press has latched on to the idea that cookies are bad. The press is spreading the idea that cookies should be lumped in with spyware and spam and are used to take advantage of the consumer. But this couldn't be further from the truth. When the press addresses this issue in this manner, it creates fear in the mind of the consumer and fear is a very powerful force. The truth is that without cookies and other methods of counting or measuring the consumer, the landscape would be worse and advertising would even further annoy consumers. Without cookies, we would be unable to target the user with messages that are more likely to be relevant to them. In a world without counting and measurement, every woman would be inundated with Viagra ads and every man with ads for Midol.
This week we launched Safecount, a volunteer effort from professionals in the industry, which will provide a public forum to discuss this very topic.
If you get a moment, check out www.safecount.org. Safecount is looking to gather support and raise awareness in the public consciousness that cookies are not to be lumped in with spyware and spam. Safecount will not promote one method over another, but will push for safe counting mechanisms that are safe for the consumer and safe for the advertiser. We recognize that the consumer can feel overwhelmed by marketing and the result of this feeling is a slowly growing technical arms race over advertising and data collection. This arms race could result in the removal of these counting mechanisms, which would severely affect ecommerce, diminish the user experience with the Internet, and creep into the rest of the landscape as all media is quickly transitioning into digital formats. This is a topic we need to address now and set a precedent before things get worse.
If you're reading this article, you need to be involved. Visit Safecount and find out what other people are saying about the issue. Sign up for the online petition and show your support for addressing this topic publicly. If you speak to the press or you speak to anyone involved in the various legislative actions to place parameters around counting mechanisms in advertising, convey this message and help us come to a reasonable solution that will work for all parties involved.
Advertising - Cookies = Clutter
If you read my column regularly, you'll note that one of my favorite topics of discussion is clutter. Our world is becoming increasingly cluttered and it's only going to get worse. The more the consumer becomes immunized and unresponsive to established forms of advertising, the more we find innovative, ingenious ways to speak to them and convey the messages of our brands. Hopefully these messages are targeted to the consumers we want to speak to and we avoid disturbing those consumers who show no interest.
The current discussion around cookie deletion is frightening because the press has latched on to the idea that cookies are bad. The press is spreading the idea that cookies should be lumped in with spyware and spam and are used to take advantage of the consumer. But this couldn't be further from the truth. When the press addresses this issue in this manner, it creates fear in the mind of the consumer and fear is a very powerful force. The truth is that without cookies and other methods of counting or measuring the consumer, the landscape would be worse and advertising would even further annoy consumers. Without cookies, we would be unable to target the user with messages that are more likely to be relevant to them. In a world without counting and measurement, every woman would be inundated with Viagra ads and every man with ads for Midol.
This week we launched Safecount, a volunteer effort from professionals in the industry, which will provide a public forum to discuss this very topic.
If you get a moment, check out www.safecount.org. Safecount is looking to gather support and raise awareness in the public consciousness that cookies are not to be lumped in with spyware and spam. Safecount will not promote one method over another, but will push for safe counting mechanisms that are safe for the consumer and safe for the advertiser. We recognize that the consumer can feel overwhelmed by marketing and the result of this feeling is a slowly growing technical arms race over advertising and data collection. This arms race could result in the removal of these counting mechanisms, which would severely affect ecommerce, diminish the user experience with the Internet, and creep into the rest of the landscape as all media is quickly transitioning into digital formats. This is a topic we need to address now and set a precedent before things get worse.
If you're reading this article, you need to be involved. Visit Safecount and find out what other people are saying about the issue. Sign up for the online petition and show your support for addressing this topic publicly. If you speak to the press or you speak to anyone involved in the various legislative actions to place parameters around counting mechanisms in advertising, convey this message and help us come to a reasonable solution that will work for all parties involved.
Most Consumers Misunderstand Cookies
MORE THAN THREE-QUARTERS OF ONLINE users say they know what cookies are, but only three out of 10 can accurately define cookies, according to a recent study by Insight Express. The full report, to be presented today at Ad:Tech, was based on an April online survey of 800 Internet users and in-depth interviews with 300 participants.
Seventy-seven percent of respondents said they knew what cookies were, but when pressed for a definition, only 29 percent were able to give a correct definition, such as "a file that is stored on your computer that contains information for a specific Web site." Almost half--47 percent--provided incorrect definitions, such as "a connection left on your computer for someone to use to contact your computer again." An additional 24 percent said they weren't sure.
A portion of the report released last week revealed that only 35 percent of a portion of respondents--the 50 percent who agreed to delete cookies for the researchers--were able to do so.
Most of the respondents--around 56 percent--said they manually deleted cookies at least once a month, with 16 percent saying they purged cookies daily, 22 percent reporting doing so once a week, and 17 percent saying they erased cookies monthly. Other recent reports also have shown that consumers are deleting cookies; a study by Jupiter Research last month shocked many online ad executives with its conclusion that 39 percent of consumers purge cookies monthly.
Why do consumers delete cookies? The most popular reason, cited by 77 percent of the InsightExpress respondents, was to free up disk space, while 67 percent said they did so to protect privacy and prevent tracking. Other common reasons included deleting spyware/adware, cited by 57 percent of respondents; making the computer run faster (57 percent); and because it was recommended that they do so (51 percent).
Despite the deletions, the report concludes that cookies still "provide substantially better information than available in offline media."
Seventy-seven percent of respondents said they knew what cookies were, but when pressed for a definition, only 29 percent were able to give a correct definition, such as "a file that is stored on your computer that contains information for a specific Web site." Almost half--47 percent--provided incorrect definitions, such as "a connection left on your computer for someone to use to contact your computer again." An additional 24 percent said they weren't sure.
A portion of the report released last week revealed that only 35 percent of a portion of respondents--the 50 percent who agreed to delete cookies for the researchers--were able to do so.
Most of the respondents--around 56 percent--said they manually deleted cookies at least once a month, with 16 percent saying they purged cookies daily, 22 percent reporting doing so once a week, and 17 percent saying they erased cookies monthly. Other recent reports also have shown that consumers are deleting cookies; a study by Jupiter Research last month shocked many online ad executives with its conclusion that 39 percent of consumers purge cookies monthly.
Why do consumers delete cookies? The most popular reason, cited by 77 percent of the InsightExpress respondents, was to free up disk space, while 67 percent said they did so to protect privacy and prevent tracking. Other common reasons included deleting spyware/adware, cited by 57 percent of respondents; making the computer run faster (57 percent); and because it was recommended that they do so (51 percent).
Despite the deletions, the report concludes that cookies still "provide substantially better information than available in offline media."
Ad Industry Executives Join Forces To Preserve Cookies
TWO ONLINE AD INDUSTRY EXECUTIVES Monday announced a new initiative designed to advocate to preserve cookies and other digital media measurement mechanisms. Dubbed Safecount.org, the coalition hopes to offer a forum where advertisers and consumers can agree on safe yet accurate measurement tools.
Cory Treffiletti, Safecount co-founder and managing director of the San Francisco office of Carat Interactive, said it's in everyone's interest to give advertisers the tools to understand basic information about individual consumers. "Based on this information, advertisers can serve ads that are timely and relevant to individual consumers, while limiting the number of times consumers are shown an advertisement," said Treffiletti.
Until recently, it was widely assumed that consumers did not delete cookies in any significant numbers. But a spate of recent studies, including a Jupiter Research report revealing that 40 percent of Internet users say they delete their cookies at least once a month, indicated otherwise.
"We definitely created a monster when we released our cookie report," said Eric Peterson, the Jupiter analyst who authored the controversial study. "But I do think it's encouraging that we're moving beyond the bickering about the numbers and on to larger efforts to resolve this issue."
Nick Nyhan, Safecount's other co-founder and president of the market research company Dynamic Logic, said that the online industry has gone too long without a resolution to the measurement issue. "The Jupiter case was just a symptom of a larger problem," said Nyhan. "We're not downplaying very real concerns that have existed for consumers about privacy protection. We want to address them and avoid the arms race we're heading towards with consumers, where each move is countered by another and no one gets anything out of it."
Nyhan added that measurement's woes included--but extended beyond--just cookies. "I don't think we should be writing the obituary for cookies just yet, especially when the degree to which they are effective is still being explored," Nyhan said. "But this debate is much larger than just cookies; we'd still be having this debate if another measurement device were in the place of cookies right now."
Jupiter's Peterson, however, questioned whether the world needs another organization to address measurement tools and consumers' perception of them.
Safecount is working with one such organization, the Network Advertising Initiative, as a sponsor of its "eCommerce in the Age of Spyware" event in New York City on May 12. The Network Advertising Initiative e-mail service provider coalition has been working broadly for five years to inform consumers about Internet advertising practices and how it affects them and the Internet.
Trevor Hughes, executive director of the Network Advertising Initiative, said he supported Safecount's efforts. "While we've been working toward similar standards for five years, that seems to be their only concern--which could work in their favor."
While Treffiletti believes that anti-spyware companies have largely contributed to cookies' poor image, he also said that such companies must be given a voice in future talks to resolve the issue. "Anti-spyware companies can't be ignored, nor can they be dismissed as the bad guys," Treffiletti said.
Eric Howes, a spyware researcher who operates SpywareWarrior.com, a Web site devoted to problematic anti-spyware tools, said it was legitimate for agencies and researchers to try to protect their measurement methods--as long as consumers were informed. "Anti-spyware vendors tell me that consumers often just want all cookies to be deleted, and I do think it's a problem when anti-spyware vendors don't do more to educate consumers, but consumers still have to be given an opportunity to make a decision even if it's the wrong one."
Representatives of the new coalition include advertisers, consumer advocacy groups, ad agencies, market researchers, publishers, advertising technologists, and policy analysts. Executives who have already expressed support include industry leaders such as Brian Monahan, a vice president and interactive media director at Universal McCann; Dave Morgan, CEO of behavioral targeting company TACODA Systems; and Mike Zeman, associate director of insights and analytics at Starcom IP, a unit of Starcom MediaVest Group.
Cory Treffiletti, Safecount co-founder and managing director of the San Francisco office of Carat Interactive, said it's in everyone's interest to give advertisers the tools to understand basic information about individual consumers. "Based on this information, advertisers can serve ads that are timely and relevant to individual consumers, while limiting the number of times consumers are shown an advertisement," said Treffiletti.
Until recently, it was widely assumed that consumers did not delete cookies in any significant numbers. But a spate of recent studies, including a Jupiter Research report revealing that 40 percent of Internet users say they delete their cookies at least once a month, indicated otherwise.
"We definitely created a monster when we released our cookie report," said Eric Peterson, the Jupiter analyst who authored the controversial study. "But I do think it's encouraging that we're moving beyond the bickering about the numbers and on to larger efforts to resolve this issue."
Nick Nyhan, Safecount's other co-founder and president of the market research company Dynamic Logic, said that the online industry has gone too long without a resolution to the measurement issue. "The Jupiter case was just a symptom of a larger problem," said Nyhan. "We're not downplaying very real concerns that have existed for consumers about privacy protection. We want to address them and avoid the arms race we're heading towards with consumers, where each move is countered by another and no one gets anything out of it."
Nyhan added that measurement's woes included--but extended beyond--just cookies. "I don't think we should be writing the obituary for cookies just yet, especially when the degree to which they are effective is still being explored," Nyhan said. "But this debate is much larger than just cookies; we'd still be having this debate if another measurement device were in the place of cookies right now."
Jupiter's Peterson, however, questioned whether the world needs another organization to address measurement tools and consumers' perception of them.
Safecount is working with one such organization, the Network Advertising Initiative, as a sponsor of its "eCommerce in the Age of Spyware" event in New York City on May 12. The Network Advertising Initiative e-mail service provider coalition has been working broadly for five years to inform consumers about Internet advertising practices and how it affects them and the Internet.
Trevor Hughes, executive director of the Network Advertising Initiative, said he supported Safecount's efforts. "While we've been working toward similar standards for five years, that seems to be their only concern--which could work in their favor."
While Treffiletti believes that anti-spyware companies have largely contributed to cookies' poor image, he also said that such companies must be given a voice in future talks to resolve the issue. "Anti-spyware companies can't be ignored, nor can they be dismissed as the bad guys," Treffiletti said.
Eric Howes, a spyware researcher who operates SpywareWarrior.com, a Web site devoted to problematic anti-spyware tools, said it was legitimate for agencies and researchers to try to protect their measurement methods--as long as consumers were informed. "Anti-spyware vendors tell me that consumers often just want all cookies to be deleted, and I do think it's a problem when anti-spyware vendors don't do more to educate consumers, but consumers still have to be given an opportunity to make a decision even if it's the wrong one."
Representatives of the new coalition include advertisers, consumer advocacy groups, ad agencies, market researchers, publishers, advertising technologists, and policy analysts. Executives who have already expressed support include industry leaders such as Brian Monahan, a vice president and interactive media director at Universal McCann; Dave Morgan, CEO of behavioral targeting company TACODA Systems; and Mike Zeman, associate director of insights and analytics at Starcom IP, a unit of Starcom MediaVest Group.
Monday, April 25, 2005
They’re trying out cookie-buster busters
NEW YORK (AP) — The company behind those floating ads that dance across Web pages has developed a way to restore the data profiles that many privacy-conscious users try to delete from their computers.
Most users don’t know what they are doing when they run antispyware programs that delete the profiles, known as cookies, said Mookie Tenembaum, founder of United Virtualities Inc.
By deleting cookies, he said, users thwart efforts by Web sites to prevent the same ads from appearing over and over. Tenembaum said visitors are also forced to repeatedly enter usernames and passwords, which are sometimes stored in the profiles.
United Virtualities calls the product Persistent Identification Element. It taps a separate profile system that’s found in Macromedia Inc.’s Flash and that’s not generally affected by antispyware programs.
Using the product, when a Web site discovers a cookie missing, it can look for a backup in Flash and restore the cookie.
Richard M. Smith, a privacy and security consultant in Cambridge, Mass., was critical of United Virtualities.
“Companies should respect people’s choices,” he said, “If a consumer makes the effort of getting antispyware software, they don’t want this stuff.”
Macromedia responded by issuing instructions for turning the profile system off: http://www.macromedia.com/go/52697ee8.
Tenembaum acknowledged that his product might displease what he described as the handful of knowledgeable users who had consciously deleted their cookies.
But “we cannot make everybody happy all of the time,” he said. “We can make most of the people happy most of the time.
Most users don’t know what they are doing when they run antispyware programs that delete the profiles, known as cookies, said Mookie Tenembaum, founder of United Virtualities Inc.
By deleting cookies, he said, users thwart efforts by Web sites to prevent the same ads from appearing over and over. Tenembaum said visitors are also forced to repeatedly enter usernames and passwords, which are sometimes stored in the profiles.
United Virtualities calls the product Persistent Identification Element. It taps a separate profile system that’s found in Macromedia Inc.’s Flash and that’s not generally affected by antispyware programs.
Using the product, when a Web site discovers a cookie missing, it can look for a backup in Flash and restore the cookie.
Richard M. Smith, a privacy and security consultant in Cambridge, Mass., was critical of United Virtualities.
“Companies should respect people’s choices,” he said, “If a consumer makes the effort of getting antispyware software, they don’t want this stuff.”
Macromedia responded by issuing instructions for turning the profile system off: http://www.macromedia.com/go/52697ee8.
Tenembaum acknowledged that his product might displease what he described as the handful of knowledgeable users who had consciously deleted their cookies.
But “we cannot make everybody happy all of the time,” he said. “We can make most of the people happy most of the time.
No comments:
Keywords:
advertising,
Analytics,
behavioral targeting,
cookies,
delete cookies,
google,
iab,
privacy
Keywords:
advertising,
Analytics,
behavioral targeting,
cookies,
delete cookies,
google,
iab,
privacy
Sunday, April 24, 2005
New cookies much harder to crumble
These aren't your grandma's cookies.
And they aren't the traditional electronic cookies that created a file on your computer's hard drive when you visited a Web site. This file, or cookie, would record data about you, perhaps your password and preferences. More than a third of users have learned to delete these cookies from their computers each month.
Now there's a different batch of cookies - they're newer, they're tougher, and they stay around a lot longer. They come with persistent identification element, a little-known technology that evades cookie deletion. PIE hides within a little-known corner of your computer. PIE recreates itself even after a user deletes a cookie by making a backup copy.
Introduced in early April, PIE is the latest escalation in the cookie wars, and it already is creating controversy among Web site operators and other industry players. Many are outraged and say such aggressive tactics will spur users to distrust all cookies and take drastic measures that will worsen the Web experience.
The furor started in March, when Eric Peterson, an analyst at Jupiter Research, revealed a survey that showed as many as 39 percent of online users might be deleting "cookies" from their primary computer at least monthly.
Users aren't just doing it manually. They're downloading anti-spyware software, which also erases many cookies, bringing the cookie deletion rate as high as 58 percent of users in a year, according to Jupiter.
Web sites use cookies to assign a user number, or cookies can include others things, such as shopping cart information, so you don't have to type it all in again when you return.
Trouble is, the spike in cookie deletions is causing alarm among Web site operators, who depend on the personal information to track crucial business metrics: customer count, number of return visitors, performance by ads and a customer's reaction to them.
The advertising industry is facing some of the biggest effects of cookie deletions. Advertisers depend on "third-party" cookies, or those put on your hard drive by a partner of the Web site you visit - such as advertisers. Anti-spyware software programs increasingly are deleting these.
"We're trying to get a handle on this," said Kevin Lee, founder of Did-it.com, which helps companies advertise online.
He knows there's a growing deletion trend but says his company still is studying its magnitude.
PIE is offered by a New York company called United Virtualities.
Founder Mookie Tenembaum says he has already signed up "more than 10" customers using it.
Delivered by cookie, PIE hides in the "local shared objects" feature of the Macromedia Flash Player, a technology loaded on more than 98 percent of computers. It protects other cookies by making backup copies even if they are deleted.
PIE can be shut off only if a user decides to reject all cookies at the outset, Tenembaum says.
But such a blanket rejection policy, which can be implemented by tinkering with a browser's settings, is a draconian step for most users; it means shutting down cookies for their favorite sites, too.
One potential result of PIE, Peterson and others say, could be that consumers become so suspicious of all cookies, including the "flash cookies" on Macromedia's player, most of which are benign, that they will demand anti-spyware software programs that erase everything, flash cookies included.
Anti-spyware companies have a financial incentive to hype the danger of cookies so they can sell more software - something Tenembaum says his cookies aims to combat.
And they aren't the traditional electronic cookies that created a file on your computer's hard drive when you visited a Web site. This file, or cookie, would record data about you, perhaps your password and preferences. More than a third of users have learned to delete these cookies from their computers each month.
Now there's a different batch of cookies - they're newer, they're tougher, and they stay around a lot longer. They come with persistent identification element, a little-known technology that evades cookie deletion. PIE hides within a little-known corner of your computer. PIE recreates itself even after a user deletes a cookie by making a backup copy.
Introduced in early April, PIE is the latest escalation in the cookie wars, and it already is creating controversy among Web site operators and other industry players. Many are outraged and say such aggressive tactics will spur users to distrust all cookies and take drastic measures that will worsen the Web experience.
The furor started in March, when Eric Peterson, an analyst at Jupiter Research, revealed a survey that showed as many as 39 percent of online users might be deleting "cookies" from their primary computer at least monthly.
Users aren't just doing it manually. They're downloading anti-spyware software, which also erases many cookies, bringing the cookie deletion rate as high as 58 percent of users in a year, according to Jupiter.
Web sites use cookies to assign a user number, or cookies can include others things, such as shopping cart information, so you don't have to type it all in again when you return.
Trouble is, the spike in cookie deletions is causing alarm among Web site operators, who depend on the personal information to track crucial business metrics: customer count, number of return visitors, performance by ads and a customer's reaction to them.
The advertising industry is facing some of the biggest effects of cookie deletions. Advertisers depend on "third-party" cookies, or those put on your hard drive by a partner of the Web site you visit - such as advertisers. Anti-spyware software programs increasingly are deleting these.
"We're trying to get a handle on this," said Kevin Lee, founder of Did-it.com, which helps companies advertise online.
He knows there's a growing deletion trend but says his company still is studying its magnitude.
PIE is offered by a New York company called United Virtualities.
Founder Mookie Tenembaum says he has already signed up "more than 10" customers using it.
Delivered by cookie, PIE hides in the "local shared objects" feature of the Macromedia Flash Player, a technology loaded on more than 98 percent of computers. It protects other cookies by making backup copies even if they are deleted.
PIE can be shut off only if a user decides to reject all cookies at the outset, Tenembaum says.
But such a blanket rejection policy, which can be implemented by tinkering with a browser's settings, is a draconian step for most users; it means shutting down cookies for their favorite sites, too.
One potential result of PIE, Peterson and others say, could be that consumers become so suspicious of all cookies, including the "flash cookies" on Macromedia's player, most of which are benign, that they will demand anti-spyware software programs that erase everything, flash cookies included.
Anti-spyware companies have a financial incentive to hype the danger of cookies so they can sell more software - something Tenembaum says his cookies aims to combat.
Monday, April 18, 2005
Cookies Compared To TVs Tracking Usage
Cookies Compared To TVs Tracking Usage
David Utter 2005-07-18
The question of web sites using cookies has returned as spyware gets more focus from the public and lawmakers.
Legendary technology columnist Walt Mossberg claims in a recent column that if someone's TV reported information back to a company to use or sell for advertising purposes, without that person's knowledge, they would be outraged.
He further likens that situation to the continued usage and presence of web site cookies that silently perform the same function. Anti-spyware programs can detect and remove these cookies as needed.
But that TV outrage may not be as pronounced as one might think. TiVo, the digital video recording service, has been collecting viewing information for some time. Users of TiVo Basic cannot opt out of that collection, but Plus users can by making a phone call.
With less that two million members, far less than the number of people in the US who use the Internet, TiVo is not a ubiquitous presence. But like users of the Apple line of Macintosh computers, TiVo has a small niche of loyal followers.
TiVo doesn't breakout the numbers on how many viewers have opted out of data collection. It doesn't seem like a lot of them would have done so, anyway.
When digital TVs arrive in a few years, mandated by the end of analog broadcasts, components like TiVo and other "enhancements" will probably be available. Those services should note somewhere in the privacy policy that anonymous data is collected, and, yes, it may be shared with third parties.
And the public will yawn, and go back to watching Survivor.
Cookies have become a problem because of their misuse, not their use. Legitimate web sites use them to remember their returning users. Online versions of print newspapers, like Mr. Mossberg's Wall Street Journal home, use cookies this way. A user with cookies enabled doesn't have to login every time they visit.
Problem cookies have become so through inertia. Only when users begin widely rejecting third-party tracking cookies will they lose their appeal for advertisers. Until then, they will continue to be offered.
David Utter 2005-07-18
The question of web sites using cookies has returned as spyware gets more focus from the public and lawmakers.
Legendary technology columnist Walt Mossberg claims in a recent column that if someone's TV reported information back to a company to use or sell for advertising purposes, without that person's knowledge, they would be outraged.
He further likens that situation to the continued usage and presence of web site cookies that silently perform the same function. Anti-spyware programs can detect and remove these cookies as needed.
But that TV outrage may not be as pronounced as one might think. TiVo, the digital video recording service, has been collecting viewing information for some time. Users of TiVo Basic cannot opt out of that collection, but Plus users can by making a phone call.
With less that two million members, far less than the number of people in the US who use the Internet, TiVo is not a ubiquitous presence. But like users of the Apple line of Macintosh computers, TiVo has a small niche of loyal followers.
TiVo doesn't breakout the numbers on how many viewers have opted out of data collection. It doesn't seem like a lot of them would have done so, anyway.
When digital TVs arrive in a few years, mandated by the end of analog broadcasts, components like TiVo and other "enhancements" will probably be available. Those services should note somewhere in the privacy policy that anonymous data is collected, and, yes, it may be shared with third parties.
And the public will yawn, and go back to watching Survivor.
Cookies have become a problem because of their misuse, not their use. Legitimate web sites use them to remember their returning users. Online versions of print newspapers, like Mr. Mossberg's Wall Street Journal home, use cookies this way. A user with cookies enabled doesn't have to login every time they visit.
Problem cookies have become so through inertia. Only when users begin widely rejecting third-party tracking cookies will they lose their appeal for advertisers. Until then, they will continue to be offered.
Monday, April 11, 2005
Rising Cookie Rejection Bites Into Metrics
Rising Cookie Rejection Bites Into Metrics
July 11, 2005
By: Mickey Alam Khan
Marketers assembled this week at the Ad:tech Chicago conference to discuss the finer points of online marketing must chew on the growing rejection of cookies.
As recent studies show, consumers increasingly resist the placement on their computers of cookies — small files that Web sites use to identify users and serve targeted online ads and copy.
A cookie rejection study from online analytics firm WebTrends Inc. found average third-party cookie rejection rates across all industries have risen more than fourfold in 16 months, from 2.84 percent of online visitors in January 2004 to 12.4 percent in April 2005.
“The effects of cookie rejection typically result in the loss of unique and repeat visitor metrics, and in some cases the Web analytics system does not track the visit at all,” said Jeff Seacrist, director of product marketing at WebTrends, Portland, OR.
“Report distortion from cookie rejection is much greater if the Web analytics solution relies heavily on cookies for purchase histories or campaign responses or as the solution’s only method to sessionize visits,” he said.
WebTrends’ study is distinct from others that focus on growing cookie deletion rates, even though cookie rejection should cause more alarm. Rejection refers to visitors blocking cookies from ever being set on their machines, while deletion occurs after the consumer has visited a site.
While cookie rejection rates have leveled off since January, WebTrends finds the trend itself is fueled mainly by software that blocks third-party cookies. This includes personal firewalls, proxy servers, anti-spyware software and available settings in the Windows XP Service Pack 2 release of Microsoft’s Internet Explorer browser.
The retail sector, at a 16.9 percent rate, is the leading industry vertical experiencing third-party cookie rejection. Close behind are telecommunications’ 15.4 percent, healthcare’s 14.7 percent, manufacturing’s 13.3 percent and transportation’s 13 percent.
WebTrends analyzed 16-month data spanning 5 billion visitor sessions from the most trafficked sites on its hosted on demand service using third-party cookies to calculate an average rejection rate for each month.
Seacrist admitted the exact number of visitors who block cookies from being set on their machines cannot be determined, mainly because they are rejecting cookies. For instance, a single consumer visiting a particular site more than once is recorded as a new visitor each time.
Research in the marketplace confirms that third-party cookies are vulnerable to blocking and deletion. One way to address that issue is for sites to switch to using more legitimate first-party cookies in their analytics to generate more accurate data on consumer behavior online. First-party cookies are served to the visitor’s browser directly from the Web site’s domain, rather than from a third-party Web analytics vender.
WebTrends has another suggestion. Analytics solutions should offer backup sessionization methods that do not rely on cookies to get a comprehensive view of visitor behavior and the performance of online marketing campaigns.
There is little doubt that the typical online consumer misunderstands cookies. Web analytics firms and industry associations must educate the public on cookies and their use.
“Even though most every cookie is benign, only containing a unique ID, visitors are wary of third-party cookies, which, by their very nature, are not served by the site that the person has chosen to visit,” Seacrist said. “Businesses need to move to first-party cookies and maintain clear privacy policies. There also needs to be a best practice methodology used by vendors that relies on genuine first-party cookies rather than tricking browsers and that stores only the most necessary information within a cookie.”
Separate studies from online market researcher InsightExpress, Stamford, CT, confirm the need for more consumer education around cookies.
The studies found that three-quarters of the polled consumers said they knew what cookies were. But only 25 percent of them described correctly what a cookie does or is.
Of those responding, 77 percent said they delete cookies to clean up the computer and free up memory, 67 percent wanted to protect their privacy and prevent tracking and 57 percent sought to delete or remove spyware.
“Some even thought deleting cookies would eliminate spam or prevent viruses,” said Sandy Kraft, formerly vice president of marketing at InsightExpress. “Only the tracking prevention reason is a true benefit of cookie deletion. So many are, or think they are, deleting cookies for the wrong reasons.”
Three-quarters of the consumers in the InsightExpress studies said they use software to detect adware or spyware. Some of these programs identify cookies as potential threats to consumers’ computers.
That said, the Interactive Advertising Bureau and Safecount, an all-volunteer industry effort to help accurate measurement of media, announced initiatives to help cut cookie deletion rates.
“At present, cookie tracking still yields more direct and accurate feedback of campaign results than nearly most types of marketing,” Kraft said.
July 11, 2005
By: Mickey Alam Khan
Marketers assembled this week at the Ad:tech Chicago conference to discuss the finer points of online marketing must chew on the growing rejection of cookies.
As recent studies show, consumers increasingly resist the placement on their computers of cookies — small files that Web sites use to identify users and serve targeted online ads and copy.
A cookie rejection study from online analytics firm WebTrends Inc. found average third-party cookie rejection rates across all industries have risen more than fourfold in 16 months, from 2.84 percent of online visitors in January 2004 to 12.4 percent in April 2005.
“The effects of cookie rejection typically result in the loss of unique and repeat visitor metrics, and in some cases the Web analytics system does not track the visit at all,” said Jeff Seacrist, director of product marketing at WebTrends, Portland, OR.
“Report distortion from cookie rejection is much greater if the Web analytics solution relies heavily on cookies for purchase histories or campaign responses or as the solution’s only method to sessionize visits,” he said.
WebTrends’ study is distinct from others that focus on growing cookie deletion rates, even though cookie rejection should cause more alarm. Rejection refers to visitors blocking cookies from ever being set on their machines, while deletion occurs after the consumer has visited a site.
While cookie rejection rates have leveled off since January, WebTrends finds the trend itself is fueled mainly by software that blocks third-party cookies. This includes personal firewalls, proxy servers, anti-spyware software and available settings in the Windows XP Service Pack 2 release of Microsoft’s Internet Explorer browser.
The retail sector, at a 16.9 percent rate, is the leading industry vertical experiencing third-party cookie rejection. Close behind are telecommunications’ 15.4 percent, healthcare’s 14.7 percent, manufacturing’s 13.3 percent and transportation’s 13 percent.
WebTrends analyzed 16-month data spanning 5 billion visitor sessions from the most trafficked sites on its hosted on demand service using third-party cookies to calculate an average rejection rate for each month.
Seacrist admitted the exact number of visitors who block cookies from being set on their machines cannot be determined, mainly because they are rejecting cookies. For instance, a single consumer visiting a particular site more than once is recorded as a new visitor each time.
Research in the marketplace confirms that third-party cookies are vulnerable to blocking and deletion. One way to address that issue is for sites to switch to using more legitimate first-party cookies in their analytics to generate more accurate data on consumer behavior online. First-party cookies are served to the visitor’s browser directly from the Web site’s domain, rather than from a third-party Web analytics vender.
WebTrends has another suggestion. Analytics solutions should offer backup sessionization methods that do not rely on cookies to get a comprehensive view of visitor behavior and the performance of online marketing campaigns.
There is little doubt that the typical online consumer misunderstands cookies. Web analytics firms and industry associations must educate the public on cookies and their use.
“Even though most every cookie is benign, only containing a unique ID, visitors are wary of third-party cookies, which, by their very nature, are not served by the site that the person has chosen to visit,” Seacrist said. “Businesses need to move to first-party cookies and maintain clear privacy policies. There also needs to be a best practice methodology used by vendors that relies on genuine first-party cookies rather than tricking browsers and that stores only the most necessary information within a cookie.”
Separate studies from online market researcher InsightExpress, Stamford, CT, confirm the need for more consumer education around cookies.
The studies found that three-quarters of the polled consumers said they knew what cookies were. But only 25 percent of them described correctly what a cookie does or is.
Of those responding, 77 percent said they delete cookies to clean up the computer and free up memory, 67 percent wanted to protect their privacy and prevent tracking and 57 percent sought to delete or remove spyware.
“Some even thought deleting cookies would eliminate spam or prevent viruses,” said Sandy Kraft, formerly vice president of marketing at InsightExpress. “Only the tracking prevention reason is a true benefit of cookie deletion. So many are, or think they are, deleting cookies for the wrong reasons.”
Three-quarters of the consumers in the InsightExpress studies said they use software to detect adware or spyware. Some of these programs identify cookies as potential threats to consumers’ computers.
That said, the Interactive Advertising Bureau and Safecount, an all-volunteer industry effort to help accurate measurement of media, announced initiatives to help cut cookie deletion rates.
“At present, cookie tracking still yields more direct and accurate feedback of campaign results than nearly most types of marketing,” Kraft said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)