When Opting Out of Ad Tracking Doesn't Opt You Out

jfruh writes "Privacy blogger Dan Tynan couldn't help but notice the ads targeting his web browsing for a plus-sized women's clothing store, not least because he's neither a woman nor plus-sized. But trying to figure out why those ads kept popping up in his browser led to some disturbing discoveries. He had opted out of targeted Google ads, and at first glance the ads seemed to come from Google — but digging deeper, he found that Google's DoubleClick was only the intermediary, which meant his opt-out didn't apply. And his opt-outs from other ad services seemed to have vanished."

Comments

opt-outs

[girlintraining]

Opt-outs are a scam. They have been since the late 90s. Opting out just tells spammers that they hit a real e-mail address, and thus its value goes up. It also tells them one other important piece of information: You're willing to click on links that send you to random websites.

Anyone who tries to 'opt out' is an idiot, and anyone who suggests them as a solution to spam and advertising should be dragged into the street and stoned to death. There is only one solution: Get rid of all of it. The end. Stop your monetization of the web 2.0 synergizing cluster fuck of the internet... it survived just fine before you vultures descended on it. It will survive your demise as well.

Re:opt-outs

[Opportunist]

The problem is that really reputable companies that actually care about their reputation are not really the ones that clog your inbox with ad crap. You might get a news letter or two every other month or a few select offers that actually apply to you instead of blanket carpet bombing of their entire customer base with whatever piddly crap they're hawking this time.

The companies that WOULD actually heed your opt-out are also the ones where you don't NEED an opt-out.

Just use adBlock

[Anonymous Coward]

And solve the problem.

Re:Just use adBlock

[i kan reed]

Yep, lots of people on the internet say "but what about the revenue of the sites you use." It ignores that there's never going to be a mutual respect there, no matter how much you respect the source.

Not sure. But I am opting out of the new slashdot.

[Anonymous Coward]

I've seen beta.slashdot.org and was horrified. Once the "old" slashdot goes away, so will this nearly two-decade user.

Seems to need an ad blocker.

[linebackn]

Seriously, there are STILL people out there using browsers without ad blockers?! Are they also still using IE 6?

Hint: If you are using Windows 95 or NT 3.51 then SeaMonkey 1.1.19 and Adblock 0.5 or Adblock Plus 1.0.2 do a great job.

There is just no excuse.

Re:Seems to need an ad blocker.

[Anonymous Coward]

Well... I can think of one excuse. Many websites that I like rely on advertising revenue.

And that's why adblock has a whitelist option so that you can whitelist the sites that don't display intrusive/abusive advertising. It even has a checkbox for "allow unobtrusive advertising" when selecting filters, which lets through things such as the google text based ads.

Now where's you're excuse?

Does this surprise anybody ?

[aepervius]

No , really ? I am not surprised. The ad industry torpedoed every instance of normal regulation and do not track, they are handling self regulation like robber barron, laughing all the way. There is only one option : the nuclear option, and it is adblocking. All of it. And if a web site does not want to show me anything because I block ads , well I can most probably live without that web site.

Re:Ads are anti-capitalist

[Fwipp]

It is a serious problem to me. My point is that, in any capitalist society, you can expect advertisements to be present, and they will be as sleazy and manipulative as companies can get away with.

Re:Do no evil?

[g0bshiTe]

It's only evil when you get caught.

The big question is still unanswered.

[steelfood]

All this, and the big question still goes unanswered: Why is he getting targetted for plus-sized women's clothing? I mean, the behaviorial information causing him to be an ideal candidate for purchasing plus-sized women's clothing is coming from somewhere, no?

Re:The big question is still unanswered.

[pspahn]

An interesting thing happened to me the other day.

I do use Facebook on occasion, generally as a way to aggregate a few of my interests into one place I can go for articles and such.

So the other day I go on and all of a sudden there are several "Suggested Posts" promoting engagement rings. Eh? Really? I have not been looking for engagement rings online or anywhere else, so I found it odd these ads (again, not just one, there were several from different jewelers) were targeting me.

I go ask my girlfriend, "hey, were you looking at engagement rings on my computer?" She had an awkward look about her and went on to say that she wasn't, *but*, she was looking at them on her computer at work.

Interesting.

We are not labeled on FB as "In a relationship", and any posts between us are usually because we were at the same housewarming party or something (along with a bunch of other people). Despite the fact that we aren't obviously in a relationship, FB still knows that I need to be seeing ads for engagement rings. While I don't intend on proposing to her anytime soon, the idea is still there, so it's not like the targeted ad was innaccurate.

Maybe this guy in TFA has a mother who is plus-sized and her birthday is in two weeks? These types of inferences are happening more and more, so don't be surprised when you see an ad for a product that you would never buy *for yourself* because maybe their goal is to get you to buy for that person close to you that they know you would want to buy something for.

Re:Ads are anti-capitalist

[i kan reed]

So far in this discussion, hat we're seeking, I think, isn't the wholesale replacement of capitalism, but finding a way to limit one of the more socially damaging behaviors it encourages.

It's possible to find free-market capitalism based on imperfect ideas, believe it to contain flaws, and still not find any of the alternatives inherently superior.

Re:Ads are anti-capitalist

[vux984]

How is trying to control the information people receive about your product anything but a logical and necessary outcome of capitalism?

Capitalism relies on people trying to make the best decision for themselves they can, based on what information they have.

The validity of that hypothesis rests on several assumptions:

That people are not coerced.
That people act under rational self interest.
That the competitive market itself will facilitate consumers getting the information they need to make decisions.

Advertising has achieved a level of sophistication that this is no longer entirely true. The information available is not reliable, and I cannot make informed buying decisions.

All that's left working in the customers favor is direct word of mouth, reputation systems (wherein I might trust a particular reviewer who has steered me well in the past), and government regulation (truth in advertising, labelling laws, etc... which some beleive are anti-capitalist, and everyone knows are largely co-opted and corrupted or just outright violated by the regulated industries).

Compared what the industries are prepared to expend "controlling" information; with what I have at my disposal to research something? I am at such a substantial disadvantage that I am frequently operating against my own self interest. And I'm in the minority just being truly aware of it.

For example, if I want to buy an X and I don't know much about X, and its not something my friends or family use then I'm pretty much helpless.

Word of mouth doesn't work if I don't know people I trust with an X.
I can't rely on a reviewer of X if I don't have any experience with that reviewer (and I know that many reviewers are shills, or just plain idiots)

I can't rely on review sites and such, I know in many cases the reviews are paid, the 'likes' and 'followers' and '+1' are corrupt or paid for, and full of idiots. And in the worst cases, the entire review site is 'fake' and hosted by the vendor.

I've learned to try and filter out what i need from newegg and amazon.com and other review sites -- but its cat and mouse, and the advertisers get cleverer, and my resources to combat them are not increasing proportionally. And for some products... I don't really know where to even start, and again I like to think I'm 'above average' at this 'game'.

It's sick really.

Re:Shocking... O_o

[geminidomino]

And this is why I figuratively (and literally) flip off any ass hat who comes in bitching about adblockers whenever they come up.

Malware, black-hats, etc.. are actively hostile to us, our privacy, and our systems' security, and we take steps to mitigate the threat they pose.

Advertisers have proven, time and again, that they belong in the same category, and do so overtly (they don't even try to pretend otherwise). IMNSHO, to not mitigate them borders on negligence.

Don't trust them

[Dunge]

Don't trust marketers to honor the "do not track", they never will. The solution is simple: Install AdBlock, Ghostery, Disconnect.me AND PeerBlock. Death to online tracking.