Google to stop selling ads based on your specific web browsing(wsj.com)
wsj.com
Google to stop selling ads based on your specific web browsing
https://www.wsj.com/articles/google-to-stop-selling-ads-based-on-your-specific-web-browsing-11614780021
321 comments
I remember a small story, decades ago, about a company/univeristy which was left holding the bag when the government cancelled their contract. They were constructing a lens system to go into a satellite which could purportedly read the issue date on a dime lying on the sidewalk. It was something like $15M. The implication was that the government had found something even better, and gone with that instead. If Google is publicly giving up on a particular, unpopular technology to buy some PR, I strongly suspect that they've already figured out something which will work "better" behind the scenes.
There's a lot of confusion over what this story is actually saying, and, given the obscurity with which Google deals with it's tech, I don't think this is going to get cleared up, leaving room for a lot of speculation. But one thing is absolutely certain: There's no possible way that Google is going to make a change to their biggest money maker that would make them LESS money. Maybe that just means that they consider their duopoly enough of a barrier that advertisers will be forced to accept less-targeted marketing, but I doubt it...
There's a lot of confusion over what this story is actually saying, and, given the obscurity with which Google deals with it's tech, I don't think this is going to get cleared up, leaving room for a lot of speculation. But one thing is absolutely certain: There's no possible way that Google is going to make a change to their biggest money maker that would make them LESS money. Maybe that just means that they consider their duopoly enough of a barrier that advertisers will be forced to accept less-targeted marketing, but I doubt it...
I feel like the phrase “tracking individual people” is how Google is going to keep tracking you as well as they did before.
With the announcement of federated learning of cohorts [0], it allows Google to use their massive amount of information they have on you already, as well as their dominance in AI to cut out the easy way of tracking people, and make it harder for anyone else to personalize ads.
Don’t get me wrong it’s a good thing that we are removing third-party cookies, but the idea that Google is confident they can track you without them makes me worried for the future of advertising. This move is undoubtedly going to cement google as the best ad tracking company for some time into the future.
[0]: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/24/google-extremely-confident-a...
With the announcement of federated learning of cohorts [0], it allows Google to use their massive amount of information they have on you already, as well as their dominance in AI to cut out the easy way of tracking people, and make it harder for anyone else to personalize ads.
Don’t get me wrong it’s a good thing that we are removing third-party cookies, but the idea that Google is confident they can track you without them makes me worried for the future of advertising. This move is undoubtedly going to cement google as the best ad tracking company for some time into the future.
[0]: https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/24/google-extremely-confident-a...
> It’s difficult to conceive of the internet we know today — with information on every topic, in every language, at the fingertips of billions of people — without advertising as its economic foundation
What’s difficult to conceive is how the currently bloated and monetization heavy internet could survive without advertising. An internet composed of relevant and useful information stored as light weight documents could easily (and used to) exist without advertising. Without ads we probably wouldn’t have millions of identical recipe sites with infuriating backstories, pop ups, share buttons, in-line promotions, etc. but we would still have people sharing their grandmother’s apple pie recipe on personal sites along with a few paid services that add real value instead of SEO garbage and social fluff.
What’s difficult to conceive is how the currently bloated and monetization heavy internet could survive without advertising. An internet composed of relevant and useful information stored as light weight documents could easily (and used to) exist without advertising. Without ads we probably wouldn’t have millions of identical recipe sites with infuriating backstories, pop ups, share buttons, in-line promotions, etc. but we would still have people sharing their grandmother’s apple pie recipe on personal sites along with a few paid services that add real value instead of SEO garbage and social fluff.
>>Google plans to stop selling ads based on individuals’ browsing across multiple websites
>> to target ads without collecting information about individuals from multiple websites
Key words:
Individual: They might still track persons by group, by placing people into pools of like-minded internet users and track the browsing trends of this group.
Browsing: Geographic location, sleep cycles, or media streaming/viewing preferences are still on the table.
Multiple: Tracking within one website is still a thing. YouTube habits are still a go.
Websites: Apps, and everything we do with them, are not "websites".
While I think this is a step in the right direction, I don't see this statement as very limiting. It only addresses a very narrow type of tracking.
Key words:
Individual: They might still track persons by group, by placing people into pools of like-minded internet users and track the browsing trends of this group.
Browsing: Geographic location, sleep cycles, or media streaming/viewing preferences are still on the table.
Multiple: Tracking within one website is still a thing. YouTube habits are still a go.
Websites: Apps, and everything we do with them, are not "websites".
While I think this is a step in the right direction, I don't see this statement as very limiting. It only addresses a very narrow type of tracking.
> "Instead, Google says its ad-buying tools will use new technologies it has been developing with others in what it calls a “privacy sandbox” to target ads without collecting information about individuals from multiple websites. One such technology analyzes users’ browsing habits on their own devices, and allows advertisers to target aggregated groups of users with similar interests, or “cohorts,” rather than individual users."
I'm having a hard time parsing this out, and seeing what's actually changed. How do they determine an individual's "cohort(s)", without collecting information about that individual across multiple websites?
Is it simply that the data is collected and processed client-side, rather than server-side? Would using a non-Chrome browser effectively opt-out altogether, then? I find this difficult to believe.
I'm having a hard time parsing this out, and seeing what's actually changed. How do they determine an individual's "cohort(s)", without collecting information about that individual across multiple websites?
Is it simply that the data is collected and processed client-side, rather than server-side? Would using a non-Chrome browser effectively opt-out altogether, then? I find this difficult to believe.
Hypothesis: the real motivation is that Google has determined the following:
1) we can sell all our ads for just as much money anyway, even without targeting based on web browsing, because the advertisers will take what we let them get
2) targeting based on browsing history is more complicated, requiring more developers and server capacity, which Google could certainly afford but it has plenty of other things to do that pay off better
3) it turns out that advertising based on what website you are currently on, works just as well anyway; to put it another way, all that "show a person who just bought a car an ad for another car" targeting was not really working.
"We respect privacy" sounds better than "our targeting accomplished almost nothing and you'll buy the ads anyway."
1) we can sell all our ads for just as much money anyway, even without targeting based on web browsing, because the advertisers will take what we let them get
2) targeting based on browsing history is more complicated, requiring more developers and server capacity, which Google could certainly afford but it has plenty of other things to do that pay off better
3) it turns out that advertising based on what website you are currently on, works just as well anyway; to put it another way, all that "show a person who just bought a car an ad for another car" targeting was not really working.
"We respect privacy" sounds better than "our targeting accomplished almost nothing and you'll buy the ads anyway."
The best ads I got were on Facebook, and based on something to do with my history, although in what way exactly, I cannot be sure. I got an ad about Triplebyte (got numerous job offers from that); ads for concerts that I was interested in; and ads for art exhibitions very specifically related to my interests (which I would have 100% missed if not for the ad).
So I'm super disappointed that I will not be getting such ads from Google. In fact, it annoys the hell out of me that people who are concerned about privacy created such a strong anti-ad-personalization movement. This harms people like me who prioritize getting valuable information over privacy. I think people should be allowed to enable their own privacy settings, but activists and politicians should not force their ideology on the society to such an extent as to scare corporations away from personalization.
Though to be fair, I don't recall a single useful ad from Google in my life. So maybe I overestimate the damage the privacy advocates are causing.
So I'm super disappointed that I will not be getting such ads from Google. In fact, it annoys the hell out of me that people who are concerned about privacy created such a strong anti-ad-personalization movement. This harms people like me who prioritize getting valuable information over privacy. I think people should be allowed to enable their own privacy settings, but activists and politicians should not force their ideology on the society to such an extent as to scare corporations away from personalization.
Though to be fair, I don't recall a single useful ad from Google in my life. So maybe I overestimate the damage the privacy advocates are causing.
So one of the biggest privacy invaders on the planet is charting a course towards "privacy first"?
If you believe this, maybe you would like to buy a bridge?
If you believe this, maybe you would like to buy a bridge?
It's a good time to pivot. Google is one ad-block away from loosing 70% of their revenue [1]. They should adopt the model that DuckDuckGo uses [2] and offer ads based on search query vs user data tracking.
[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/266471/distribution-of-g...
[2] https://spreadprivacy.com/duckduckgo-revenue-model/
[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/266471/distribution-of-g...
[2] https://spreadprivacy.com/duckduckgo-revenue-model/
Id say the title is incorrect, as its still selling ads based on your browsing - its just they arent directly capturing the addresses - instead using some ML for cohort analysis via their "Privacy Sandbox".
It seems to me that this is actually giving them more reach, as now it wont just be websites using google analytics, etc - but EVERY website you visit, unless the site owner specifically opts out - a google-made blackbox that sees EVERY site you visit and labels you accordingly
Few questions for the knowledgeable:
It seems to me that this is actually giving them more reach, as now it wont just be websites using google analytics, etc - but EVERY website you visit, unless the site owner specifically opts out - a google-made blackbox that sees EVERY site you visit and labels you accordingly
Few questions for the knowledgeable:
- Is it be possible to disable?
- Will they be releasing the datasets for how these ML models are constructed?
- Do sites in "incogito mode" contribute to analysis?I am a little curious why Google did not just announce that they were getting behind the system that Mozilla and Apple started talking about a year or 2 ago? (Or at least that they were working with them on something)
Otherwise like many others this makes me think that Google is still doing something fishy here and I don't trust it.
Edit: For anyone curious what I am talking about https://webkit.org/blog/8943/privacy-preserving-ad-click-att...
Otherwise like many others this makes me think that Google is still doing something fishy here and I don't trust it.
Edit: For anyone curious what I am talking about https://webkit.org/blog/8943/privacy-preserving-ad-click-att...
I suspect the entire "show users ads based on their browsing history" simply doesn't work. I don't recall ever being interested in any of the ads targeted at me.
What works for me is, I buy "Mopar Action" magazine for the ads. Back in the day I bought computer mags for the ads. And so on. Those ads were targeted at what I was actually interested in at the moment.
For another example, recently I've become interested in Film Noir movies. I go looking for them, and I get ads based on my interests last month. No sale. I look at Film Noir websites, and I want to see Film Noir movie ads, not movies I was interested in months ago. If I look at a woodworking web page, I want to see ads for woodworking tools.
On my own web pages on programming, I wish Google and Amazon would run ads based on the page content. Amazon has a way to suggest that, and I tried it out. All it would serve for weeks was Batman movie ads. Why would anyone looking at a programming page want to see Batman movie ads? I finally just disabled the Amazon ads. It's similar with Google ads.
Note that serving relevant ads in this manner has absolutely no requirement to know my browsing history.
P.S. I actually still run Amazon ads on my programming pages. However, I don't let Amazon pick the product anymore. I pick it myself, and my page generation program picks one of those products for each page. The products I pick are from a self-curated list of the best programming books available.
What works for me is, I buy "Mopar Action" magazine for the ads. Back in the day I bought computer mags for the ads. And so on. Those ads were targeted at what I was actually interested in at the moment.
For another example, recently I've become interested in Film Noir movies. I go looking for them, and I get ads based on my interests last month. No sale. I look at Film Noir websites, and I want to see Film Noir movie ads, not movies I was interested in months ago. If I look at a woodworking web page, I want to see ads for woodworking tools.
On my own web pages on programming, I wish Google and Amazon would run ads based on the page content. Amazon has a way to suggest that, and I tried it out. All it would serve for weeks was Batman movie ads. Why would anyone looking at a programming page want to see Batman movie ads? I finally just disabled the Amazon ads. It's similar with Google ads.
Note that serving relevant ads in this manner has absolutely no requirement to know my browsing history.
P.S. I actually still run Amazon ads on my programming pages. However, I don't let Amazon pick the product anymore. I pick it myself, and my page generation program picks one of those products for each page. The products I pick are from a self-curated list of the best programming books available.
This is not true, they say they are switching from third-party cookies to FLoC.
The EFF calls FLoC "bad for privacy". More information here:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/08/dont-play-googles-priv...
The EFF calls FLoC "bad for privacy". More information here:
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2019/08/dont-play-googles-priv...
Paul Graham on Twitter "What this news tells me is that Google has found a way to target ads just as effectively without using this data."
https://twitter.com/paulg/status/1367118518592888834?s=20
https://twitter.com/paulg/status/1367118518592888834?s=20
Isn't the ability to sell targeted advertisements pretty much the foundation of their business plan? The business plan they showed investors and stockholders? Maybe they'll stop indexing my behaviour against my name or social security number, but to stop tracking me or using that information is the kind of behaviour that leads to class action suits by shareholders. I suspect that this lede will only be true if one allows some pretty creative definitions of "stop", "selling", and above all "specific". The only purpose that adjective has in this sentence appears to be to grant that sort of flexibility. "Oh, no, we're not tracking that specific human being. We're only tracking the use of the computer he's sitting in front of."
This article is full of basic self-contradictions.
The very first sentence:
Immediately after that, he says:
The right way to respect user privacy in advertising is much simpler: just use what they voluntarily gave you (i.e., the words in their search terms) to present relevant advertisements. That may not provide as great of a "benefit of relevant advertising", as he puts it, but that's fine with me.
The very first sentence:
It’s difficult to conceive of the internet we know today
—with information on every topic, in every language, at
the fingertips of billions of people — without advertising
as its economic foundation.
Immediately after that, he says:
72% of people feel that almost all of what they do online is being
tracked by advertisers, technology firms or other companies, and 81%
say that the potential risks they face because of data collection
outweigh the benefits
If digital advertising doesn't evolve to address the growing
concerns people have about their privacy and how their
personal identity is being used, we risk the future of
the free and open web.
The right way to respect user privacy in advertising is much simpler: just use what they voluntarily gave you (i.e., the words in their search terms) to present relevant advertisements. That may not provide as great of a "benefit of relevant advertising", as he puts it, but that's fine with me.
This is not a major change from their previous stance.
> investing in tracking technologies that uniquely identify web users as they move from site to site across the internet.
Fundamentally they are still tracking people and still using your information to sell you advertising. They are just relying on hardware you buy and your own software to do it.
One thing I've been curious about this whole time as they've been talking up "FLOC" is what they are doing with regards to other browsers. Are they simply giving up on the ability to track non Chrome users and rely on market share?
The other piece this doesn't mention is it very specifically says "Web Browsing", not tracking in general, for example across applications on mobile devices or via integration into Android.
> investing in tracking technologies that uniquely identify web users as they move from site to site across the internet.
Fundamentally they are still tracking people and still using your information to sell you advertising. They are just relying on hardware you buy and your own software to do it.
One thing I've been curious about this whole time as they've been talking up "FLOC" is what they are doing with regards to other browsers. Are they simply giving up on the ability to track non Chrome users and rely on market share?
The other piece this doesn't mention is it very specifically says "Web Browsing", not tracking in general, for example across applications on mobile devices or via integration into Android.
“Keeping the internet open and accessible for everyone requires all of us to do more to protect privacy — and that means an end to not only third-party cookies, but also any technology used for tracking individual people as they browse the web.”
I never thought I would mistrust Google as much as I already mistrust Facebook, but here we are.
You can target ads based on the content of the webpage they are displayed on instead of constantly spying on everyone.
How about we go back to that?
You can target ads based on the content of the webpage they are displayed on instead of constantly spying on everyone.
How about we go back to that?
It's unfathomable that this has become such a complex ordeal, except insofar as that confusion has been a source of profitability for advertisers.
The first principles are exceedingly simple:
What I want: for small, insurgent, creative businesses who want to specifically get my attention to be able to do that through inexpensive, surgical messaging rather than mass advertising.
What I don't want: for middlemen (or anyone) to facilitate this using information I didn't intend to make public and can't verifiably stop my browser (and other tech) from shedding.
The first principles are exceedingly simple:
What I want: for small, insurgent, creative businesses who want to specifically get my attention to be able to do that through inexpensive, surgical messaging rather than mass advertising.
What I don't want: for middlemen (or anyone) to facilitate this using information I didn't intend to make public and can't verifiably stop my browser (and other tech) from shedding.
I briefly hoped this meant they were giving up on ad targeting.
However, my reading of this is that they’ve given up on embedding trackers in websites, and instead will embed trackers at the operating system level, where they can gather even more information.
The stuff about cohorts describes standard clustering algorithms that have been used for ad targeting for decades.
This doesn’t sound like a win for privacy. It sounds like greenwashing of a massively expanded surveillance infrastructure.
However, my reading of this is that they’ve given up on embedding trackers in websites, and instead will embed trackers at the operating system level, where they can gather even more information.
The stuff about cohorts describes standard clustering algorithms that have been used for ad targeting for decades.
This doesn’t sound like a win for privacy. It sounds like greenwashing of a massively expanded surveillance infrastructure.
I don't understand this prediction (emphasis mine):
> Google’s heft means that its move is also likely to stoke a backlash from some competitors in the digital ad business, where many companies rely on tracking individuals to target their ads, measure their effectiveness and stop fraud.
Isn't this just an opportunity for these guys to differentiate themselves from the 900 lb gorilla? And if that tracking really leads to ads with higher conversion rates then those competitors will do better than Google (until, if those ads really are better, the latter reverses its decision).
BTW this is not in any way a defense of intrusive tracking, which I consider both a tragedy and a significant waste of money. My intuition is that this tracking adds little to no benefit. I suspect we're still in the at least "50% of advertising spend is wasted"* world; more like 70%-80%. This is another nut to be cracked, and one unlikely to be addressed by any incumbent.
* Attributed to John Wanamaker (among others, though I feel he is the most likely source)
> Google’s heft means that its move is also likely to stoke a backlash from some competitors in the digital ad business, where many companies rely on tracking individuals to target their ads, measure their effectiveness and stop fraud.
Isn't this just an opportunity for these guys to differentiate themselves from the 900 lb gorilla? And if that tracking really leads to ads with higher conversion rates then those competitors will do better than Google (until, if those ads really are better, the latter reverses its decision).
BTW this is not in any way a defense of intrusive tracking, which I consider both a tragedy and a significant waste of money. My intuition is that this tracking adds little to no benefit. I suspect we're still in the at least "50% of advertising spend is wasted"* world; more like 70%-80%. This is another nut to be cracked, and one unlikely to be addressed by any incumbent.
* Attributed to John Wanamaker (among others, though I feel he is the most likely source)
“The Times They Are A-Changin'.” These types of moves from Google are interesting, while not unexpected given the mounting regulatory pressure they are facing. It’s a bit unclear which stake-holder Google is trying to optimize for: Chrome users, AdSense publishers, or itself. Time will tell how this all shakes out, but it’s important for people to realize that there are a growing number of alternatives available if you care about privacy and retaining control over your browsing activity. Neeva is a good example of an alternative search engine which prioritizes user privacy by following a subscription monetization model, avoiding the ad-ecosystem all together.
Disclaimer: I work at Neeva[1], and these opinions are my own.
[1] https://www.neeva.com
Disclaimer: I work at Neeva[1], and these opinions are my own.
[1] https://www.neeva.com
I am biased to think this was going to be just a bunch of hoopla coming from Google. They are the last company I'd expect to actually care about user privacy.
"That’s why last year Chrome announced its intent to remove support for third-party cookies," aka only Google's cookies are "safe". Sounds like Google is going to try and block it's competitors from being able to gain the information Google uses to make money (tracking information for ad revenue.)
Also this was written like someone needed to fill in the article for a C-Level headline after the headline was already chosen. Disappointing that a company like this maintains it's stranglehold on a market and tool (now commodity) that regular people have no understanding of.
"That’s why last year Chrome announced its intent to remove support for third-party cookies," aka only Google's cookies are "safe". Sounds like Google is going to try and block it's competitors from being able to gain the information Google uses to make money (tracking information for ad revenue.)
Also this was written like someone needed to fill in the article for a C-Level headline after the headline was already chosen. Disappointing that a company like this maintains it's stranglehold on a market and tool (now commodity) that regular people have no understanding of.
> However, Google will still allow its advertising customers to target users across its range of services — from YouTube, to Gmail, and Search — if users are logged into their Google accounts, Digiday reported. The announcement also doesn't affect mobile apps and mobile-app trackers. Similarly, the announcement also doesn't prevent publishers from selling ads based on information about how a user behaved on their specific site.
Looks like Google can still target users who are signed in. From this article: https://www.businessinsider.com/google-to-stop-tracking-indi...
Looks like Google can still target users who are signed in. From this article: https://www.businessinsider.com/google-to-stop-tracking-indi...
Will Facebook follow suit now, or continue to whine about Apple’s impact to small businesses?
1) Google is switching to cohort-based analysis rather than individual data. It's not a complete shut off.
2) Google already has plenty of 1st-party data from search, gmail, maps, news, etc which is more than enough to sustain the same targeting abilities.
2) Google already has plenty of 1st-party data from search, gmail, maps, news, etc which is more than enough to sustain the same targeting abilities.
the threat of regulation can be a powerful thing.
For all the hullabaloo about the Emperor’s new pErSoNaLiZeD ads, I have yet to see one about a video game or movie or book that I loved and didn’t discover through chance or word of mouth.
Meanwhile if I search for a coffin even once Amazon keeps recommending more to me. Way to go ya boffins.
@People working in the ad/tracking racket: Please, instead of trying to guess who I am or what I like, why not just let me TELL you?
Let me provide some criteria (“pixel art”, “chiptune music”) and feed you some examples (Fez, MegaMan) and try to show me similar games. Then I might actually spend some money because of an ad for once.
Meanwhile if I search for a coffin even once Amazon keeps recommending more to me. Way to go ya boffins.
@People working in the ad/tracking racket: Please, instead of trying to guess who I am or what I like, why not just let me TELL you?
Let me provide some criteria (“pixel art”, “chiptune music”) and feed you some examples (Fez, MegaMan) and try to show me similar games. Then I might actually spend some money because of an ad for once.
https://archive.is/qlvcE