Brad Berens chats with Safecount board member Mike Zeman about the fight to save cookies.

Safecount board member Mike Zeman is the director of insights and analytics for Starcom IP. In this role, he oversees the consumer insight and accountability research initiatives of all Starcom IP clients, which include Allstate, Kellogg's, Miller Brewing, Morgan Stanley/Discover Card and the U.S. Army. In addition to client-specific research, the insights and analytics function is also charged with the ideation and development of Starcom IP proprietary resources and tools.

iMedia: Let's start with the basics: we covered the launch of Safecount back in April, and then you named a board of directors in June. Now, six months post-launch, how would you describe Safecount? What is its mission? Who are its members? And, more generally, does the membership slant toward a particular population of agencies, publishers or vendors?

Mike Zeman: Safecount's mission remains the same as it was at inception, which I think is critically important. We must not lose focus of the task at hand which, both simply and complicatedly, is to enable a set of online measurement protocols that consumers can not only live with, but also appreciate and benefit from.

Certainly many of the folks in our industry and beyond have a vested stake in that mission, which is why Safecount's members span the agency, research company, ad-server, publisher and marketer arenas. And what's great is that there really isn't a majority stake by any of the above groups in terms of supporter composition. In fact, it's that heterogeneity that really ensures that all parties are forced to see the issues at hand from multiple angles.

iMedia: How would you describe Safecount's activities, triumphs and challenges of the last six months? Anything you're particularly proud of or disappointed by?

Zeman: In terms of triumphs, there have been many. First and foremost is that we've established this central forum for people in the industry to engage in a dialogue around these issues. Second would have to be the support we've received across the industry. On Safecount.org, there is an index of supporters, which is 11 scrolls down on my screen (approximately 400 people). I think that says a lot. Third, is the fact that we have helped (with others like NAI and CMOR) educate the Washington legislators that are grappling with the issues around spyware and spyware removal. Fourth, that we are gaining alignment on the buy and sell side to begin the very difficult but necessary task of having a direct dialogue with consumers around these issues. And lastly, we are proud that we have helped to push and secure behavioral-based studies of cookie-lifespan through the ARF and the IAB.

iMedia: So much of the time, we internet folks -- and the even slimmer subsection of internet marketing/advertising folks -- speak our own language, so it can be difficult for outsiders to understand. The difference, for example, between adware and spyware is clear to us, but often invisible to others. What has the experience of the Safecount folks been with this? Have you had to translate for civilians? And, if so, has the necessity of doing so been illuminating?

Zeman: We are currently going through that process. Some Safecount members have conducted research, some already public, some about to be. I would say a common theme is that consumers overall are certainly not crystal clear about cookies (even some people in that slimmer subsection of the industry are not). The real challenge, though, is that many of the misguided ones think that they are. Clearly, some education is needed, and what I can tell you is that when that education is initiated, we will be speaking through a consumer filter. Meaning, ample pre-testing will be done to ensure that our message is in a language that the average internet user can understand, and that consumers actually helped to develop.

iMedia: Is Safecount making any effort to get anti-spyware tools like Ad-Aware and WebRoot to whitelist some cookies and remove them from the spyware list? Reclassification would be one easy way of addressing the cookie perception problem? If so, what sort of cookies should be whitelisted? And what success have you had?

Zeman: What you're talking about is half of the Safecount equation. So we've got the consumer side, which largely rests with education and trust-building initiatives, and then we've got the business side. And, indeed, the end-goal there is to establish a list of cookies (and associated companies) that abide by a particular set of consumer-friendly protocols. In other words, these are cookies that should not be pooled in with those that represent potentially malicious software. Of course, enabling such a system is going to take time, but we think we are making progress.

I think we've cleared the first hurdle in that at least spyware detection companies are recognizing that a cookie in and of itself isn't an inherent danger. The next step is the formulation of what types of cookies should be whitelisted, so to speak. I can't guess what the breakout will be among company type, but, again, I think the key here is that they will be cookies worthy of consumer trust, and third-party blessed as such.

iMedia: On an individual level, do you have a sense of why the consumers who don't like cookies don't like them? These are, often enough, the same folks who will gladly sign away all their private information at the grocery store to save 10 cents on toilet paper... so why is a 4K piece of software so threatening?

Zeman: Well, I think you've really got two sets of people deleting cookies on a regular basis: 1) People who don't understand cookie technology/protocol and believe that they are malicious and invasive. 2) People who simply don't like the idea that their behavior is captured and stored in any way. In both cases, these folks are willing to sign away personally identifiable information in situations where no potential threat is perceived. Of course, it's going to be a lot easier to change the thinking of the first group (in terms of when a threat is real versus perceived) than the second, but I think the positive news is that the ratio of the two groups is probably 10 to one.

iMedia: On the same theme, Safecount talks a lot about changing the consumer and legislative mindset about cookies, but what about changes in cookies themselves. Are there technological changes on the horizon? Do you ever foresee a day when cookies would be permission-based as a default -- where as a matter of course a browser would ask before dropping a cookie?

Zeman: You know, it's hard for me to think of a situation where cookies would be opt-in on an ad-hoc basis. Reason being, you can pretty much already control the cookies that are being dropped on your machine via your browser settings. And, I don't think the opt-in versus blanket approach would alter behavior all that much given that consumers see the situation in a pretty black-and-white way. I also don't think consumers would be very receptive to the idea of having cookie permission pop-ups interrupt their internet usage on a continuous basis.

Regardless, I don't think the cookie technology is the thing that we need to be centered on. I think we must place our focus on gaining a consumer appreciation of the benefits of the type of tracking that cookies represent. As Nick Nyhan says, we don't want to get into a technological arms race with the consumer. That is simply a lose-lose situation.

iMedia: What should the industry look forward to from Safecount in the next six months?

Zeman: The industry at large will very shortly (i.e. in the next month or two) be hearing about what we feel is the beginning of the consumer education and trust-building process.

Look, we're realistic in terms of the frequency and continuity that we'll need to have in order to get this message across. But we've got to start somewhere, and we feel like we've got an approach that's going to, if nothing else, certainly be noticed by a very large portion of online consumers and will get people talking. As I mentioned, we'll also continue to work on the business side of the equation in parallel.

iMedia: Finally, what sort of help does Safecount need? What should the interested do to pitch in?

Zeman: Clearly we all stand to benefit from both the consumer and business initiatives that Safecount is pushing. So whether you are an ad-server, agency, marketer, research company, et cetera, there are certainly ways to chip in on one or both sides of the equation. There's a good chance that if you are in the industry we'll be reaching out to you. However, for those that are not contacted, please reach out to someone on the board of Safecount -- we'd love to get you involved. Additionally, if people have not already voiced their support on Safecount.org, we encourage them to do so. One group of constituents that we'd particularly like to see with a bit more representation on the support list is the marketer community.

Brad Berens is the executive editor for iMedia Communications.