Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Every Major Advertising Group Is Blasting Apple for Blocking Cookies in the Safari Browser (adweek.com)

Posted by msmash on from the fighting-back dept.

The biggest advertising organizations say Apple will "sabotage" the current economic model of the internet with plans to integrate cookie-blocking technology into the new version of Safari. Marty Swant, reporting for AdWeek: Six trade groups -- the Interactive Advertising Bureau, American Advertising Federation, the Association of National Advertisers, the 4A's and two others -- say they're "deeply concerned" with Apple's plans to release a version of the internet browser that overrides and replaces user cookie preferences with a set of Apple-controlled standards. The feature, which is called "Intelligent Tracking Prevention," limits how advertisers and websites can track users across the internet by putting in place a 24-hour limit on ad retargeting. In an open letter expected to be published this afternoon, the groups describe the new standards as "opaque and arbitrary," warning that the changes could affect the "infrastructure of the modern internet," which largely relies on consistent standards across websites. The groups say the feature also hurts user experience by making advertising more "generic and less timely and useful."

29 of 442 comments (clear)

  1. The varnish is off by AlanObject · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Who could have predicted that consumer privacy would be a lesser concern than revenue flow to industry trade groups?

    1. Re:The varnish is off by Kenja · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Anyone. Anyone could have predicted that...

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    2. Re: The varnish is off by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Advertising is a wasteful industry. It's completely not needed at all. The pharma industry unethically and immorality advertisers to consumers and give doctors perks for selling their shit instead of letting the professionals pick the appropriate medicine and treatment

      Most ads for products are for complete junk nobody actually needs. The advertising industry is a leach on society

    3. Re: The varnish is off by Cyberpunk+Reality · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think there is a legitimate market niche for advertisitng. Letting people gain awareness that things of interest to them exist is a perfectly reasonable thing to do. Lots of people go and watch movie trailers of their own volition, for example. But there is absolutely a line, beyond which advertising becomes parasitic. How much time do we collectively lose, how much wealth does our society spend, in order that some people may become wealthy selling to some other people? Where, ethically, is the line between robbery, extortion, fraud and an advertising campaign or sales pitch? I do not know exactly where the line is for responsible advertising, but as a society I think we are very far on the wrong side of it.

      --
      Rule 35 of the internet: "If it can be hacked, it will be". - Charles Stross
    4. Re: The varnish is off by JohnFen · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There is nothing inherently wrong with advertising. It serves an important role.

      But it's gone very wrong, and not just online. I think it's gone wrong in three basic ways:

      1) It generally fails to fulfill one of the primary reasons for its existence: to actually and honestly inform people about products.

      2) It has become too pervasive. Ads shouldn't cover every square inch of everything.

      3) It has become way too intrusive.

      Personally, I'm resigned to the notion that #1 and 2 will never change.

      #3, though, is completely unacceptable. The fact that advertising companies spend so much time and energy working to defeat my efforts to keep them out of my metaphorical drawers means that they have placed themselves in the role of my enemy.

      And since they have chosen to be my enemy, I will treat them as such until/unless the time comes that they can act in a more decent fashion.

  2. Can ads get any less timely and useful? by TheCastro1689 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I bought a motorcycle helmet years ago, I still get ads for the helmet and others I researched. Fucking ads suck.

    1. Re:Can ads get any less timely and useful? by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I constantly get ads for the thing I've recently purchased.

      I can't imagine a less effective form of advertising.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    2. Re:Can ads get any less timely and useful? by ljw1004 · · Score: 4, Funny

      I bought a motorcycle helmet years ago, I still get ads for the helmet and others I researched.

      Oh! But wasn't your purchase just the first step towards a lifelong hobby of collecting motorcycle helmets?

    3. Re: Can ads get any less timely and useful? by alvinrod · · Score: 4, Interesting

      That reminds me of the story about Target's initial foray into targeted ads where they could tell based on search history when a user was pregnant and had some data to suggest that if they could get a new mother to start shopping at their stores she'd likely be a good longtime customer. They were worried about it appearing creepy for them to start displaying sales ads for diapers or other baby products that people hadn't looked for yet, so they through it some ringer results (like golf clubs or scotch glasses) that would make the advertising appear more random.

      Perhaps they're selectively feeding you some ads that are more relevant, but tossing in some crap like that so it doesn't appear too obvious. Or maybe someone else temporary had that IP and was making different searches with it that are influencing the results.

    4. Re: Can ads get any less timely and useful? by sexconker · · Score: 5, Funny

      Now I can sue Target for knowing I'm pregnant before I do, yet advertising scotch glasses to me, thus encouraging me to drink alcohol while pregnant!

  3. Google, please get on board with this!!! by turp182 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Unless Apple has a patent on it...

    I have to manage enough other stuff and generally ignore cookies.

    That said, cookies do show me what my wife is shopping for on Amazon, but I don't need to see that (it is funny to call her and implicitly talk about what's she's looking at, but that only worked a couple of times).

    --
    BlameBillCosby.com
    1. Re:Google, please get on board with this!!! by captainproton1971 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You do know that Google is an advertising company, right?

    2. Re:Google, please get on board with this!!! by taustin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They are, indeed, more than just an ad company. But over 90% of the total revenue comes from advertising.

      They odds of Google "getting on board" with this are less than zero. They may well hire ninja assassins to take out the Apple execs behind this.

  4. Targeted Ads? by in10se · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If I have to see ads on a web site, my preference is that they are "generic and less timely and useful" since I'm going to ignore them anyway.

    --
    Popisms.com - Connecting pop culture
  5. It must be good then! by L-One-L-One · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If "Every Major Advertising Group" hates this, then it shows that Apple is probably doing the right thing :-)

    These guys killed "Do-Not-Track" in the US and made a joke of "cookie laws" in the EU. Looks like now they have found a stronger opponent.

    1. Re:It must be good then! by Anubis+IV · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's both, in this case.

      1) Their major competitors rely on advertising, so disrupting the advertising market has the potential to damage their competitors.

      2) Ads diminish the user experience, so disrupting their ability to operate provides immense benefit to their users and could become a differentiating factor, given that their competitors can't afford to attack ads so directly.

      So yup, it's self-serving, but their interests align with consumers in this case, so we get to win.

    2. Re:It must be good then! by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This is really significant in a few ways:

      1) This isn't something Google can do, because obviously Google's bread and butter is ads (though, let's be real—I bet Google could do better, less disruptive advertising if they wanted to)
      2) Apple's users are disproportionately represented in online purchasing. When you see stats for online Black Friday sales, most mobile sales are on iOS devices. This makes Apple's decision hit twice as hard despite having less market share.

      I'm sure it won't be long before ad agencies come up with some other irksome method of ruining my online browsing experience, but I'm so happy someone is trying *something* to mess with these guys.

    3. Re:It must be good then! by ceoyoyo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Google used to. Google used to be famous for unobtrusive, text only ads.

      Then they bought DoubleClick.

    4. Re:It must be good then! by sconeu · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The enemy of my enemy is my enemy's enemy. It does not make us friends. It may make us temporary allies.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
  6. Block third-party cookies, done... by bradley13 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I hadn't thought about it, but all major browsers allow users to block third-party cookies. If they would only make this the default behavior, it would do a world of good. And piss of the marketeers even more.

    The only problem I ever have is when I want to read comments on a site that has outsource them to an external service like Disqus. But then, that's usually a good reason to skip the site entirely...

    --
    Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
    1. Re:Block third-party cookies, done... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And most of them will die off, and nothing of value will be lost.

      There was an internet before it was taken over by the likes of marketers, and it was great.

    2. Re:Block third-party cookies, done... by Quirkz · · Score: 5, Insightful

      * I understand that I haven't clicked on an ad on purpose since 1997, so even if blocked entirely, they're not losing any money from me.
      * I understand that advertisers can still advertise without cookies. They just can't invade my privacy to do it, and they might have to pick some other metric (like being topical to the site they're on) as an idea generator.
      * I understand that sites can still run ads and make money without the use of massive spying organizations. They can make their own ads. They can use cookie-less ads. They can do a lot of things.

      So no, I don't see how adding some privacy and cookie-blocking makes everything all go away automatically, without any recourse.

      --
      The Quirkz Handbook of Self-Improvement for People Who Are Already Pretty Okay
  7. Re:Microsoft wouldn't do this by Translation+Error · · Score: 4, Funny

    Yes, Microsoft has a long history of enriching companies it works with to their mutual benefit.

    --
    When someone says, "Any fool can see ..." they're usually exactly right.
  8. Apple = Privacy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For all of the complaints people have about Apple, I feel the one thing that really sets them apart is their continuing effort to protect the user's privacy, even at the cost of software functionality. Siri has been lagging far behind other services, and at least some of it is due to her inability to track a user's preferences and habits. Apple is now introducing changes to the software that attempt to solve this by storing the information locally on the user's device so that government and law enforcement officials can't "demand" the data from Apple.

  9. Subsidies by JBMcB · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Apple doesn't subsidize their hardware by selling your private information to people.

    Ever wonder why Google gives away Android?

    --
    My Other Computer Is A Data General Nova III.
  10. Anything these jerks are against... by J053 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If the advertising industry is opposed to this move, then I'm all for it. Fuck them.

  11. Don't you want "timely and useful" ads? by clovis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The groups say the feature also hurts user experience by making advertising more "generic and less timely and useful."

    If timely and useful advertising is so valuable to us users, then why are they giving it away for free?
    They should make us pay a subscription fee to get timely and useful ads.
    And seeing what percentage of the population that signs up to pay for "timely and useful" ads would indicate whether the advertisers are full of shit or not.

  12. Your ads hurt my user experience. by Macdude · · Score: 4, Interesting

    To the Interactive Advertising Bureau, American Advertising Federation, the Association of National Advertisers, the 4A's and two others:

    Your ads hurt my user experience.
    Your tracking hurts my privacy.
    Your infected ads hurt my computer.

    Basically, you hurt people. If you disappear that will be a good thing.

    --
    "Grab them by the pussy" -- President of the United States of America
  13. Re:Oh noes!!! by JohnFen · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It will be when most sites will become paywalled. More high quality sites will go down the drain because of the lack of funds, so they'll either have to block completely (there are some already doing this) or devolve into clickbait.

    Fine by me. Most sites -- and especially sites that rely heavily on advertising -- aren't exactly indispensible to me. The ones that are, I'm already paying cash money to.

    I think it's high time for the web to break its addiction to advertising. There are other, better, ways to pay operating costs, but none of them will be adopted as long as it's easy to do ads. I don't think that it's a coincidence that the overall quality of web offerings dropped when advertising became the predominant revenue model.