At What Price Privacy? Part 2 of 2

Last time, I talked about the new online privacy bill that may be in the works, and the potential impact it could have on advertisers.

Now let’s talk about the effect of such a bill on consumers.

Remember, this is only in the early stages of consideration at this point, but the most interesting and hotly contested possible provision involves a new, broader definition of “opt in.” For the most part, opt in has been connected to email. Internet-savvy consumers know that opt in protects them from receiving spam emails. Most legitimate emailers follow the double opt in policy, asking for validation from consumers to ensure that they really want to be added to an email list in the first place. This practice prevents others from adding email addresses to lists without the address owners’ knowledge or permission.

But now under consideration is the broader concept of website opt in. If this provision manages to get into future legislation, a website visitor will have to opt in to “third party cookies,” which give companies the ability to track online behavior across multiple sites.

If a consumer is a registered customer of a particular site, it will not be an issue; so, for example, a registered Amazon customer would still be able to benefit from recommendations without opting in each time, as long as the site recognizes the visitor; i.e. the visitor hasn’t blocked cookies.

But if a consumer visits one or more sites at random, and is not recognized as a registered or returning visitor, opt in may be required for usage of third party cookies to be allowed. The reason is that behavioral targeting – the lynchpin of web ad targeting – is thought to be, by some, an invasion of privacy.

While no one knows exactly how this would really be implemented (because the legislation has yet to be written), the implications are substantial if not downright troubling. Advertisers are worried about the loss of behavioral data, and rightly so.

On the other side of the issue, consumers will lose something too. Such a policy could constrain ease of use and speed of navigation, the freedom of unrestricted information, and the “intelligence” consumers have come to expect during the consumer web surfing experience. In effect, without behavioral targeting, we have returned to the good old days of a dumb Internet, unable to understand a consumer’s informational needs and respond to them appropriately.

The legislators considering the new form of opt in say it would be a means of protecting consumer privacy. Opponents of the provision say it would reduce the ability of an advertiser to use data to achieve better targeted ads, resulting in a better user experience.

Before considering such legislation, important questions should be asked, like: Do consumers feel their privacy while browsing is being infringed? Will this opt in policy really protect a consumer’s privacy? Will companies find ways to work around the potential regulation, like maybe adding opt-in functionality under can-spam in the cart, and what will that mean to the consumer experience? Will consumers tolerate new opt in procedures, or will this simply give rise to frustration and resentment?

One wonders if the legislators are asking what their constituents want… or are these elected representatives simply playing politics with privacy?