Google is requiring changes in publishers Privacy Policy

Deadline April 8, 2009

[Skeptic]

Just got an email from the Googleplex.

Publishers are required to update their Privacy Policy to reflect the use of "interest based advertising."

Of course, they cannot suggest any "appropriate language" for the new Privacy Policy...

:sigh:

[willybfriendly]

We have chosen to punt the privacy issues back to the source.

This site contains links to other sites. <snip> is not responsible for the privacy practices or the content of such web sites.

To try and bring you offers that are of interest to you, we have relationships with other companies that we allow to place ads on our Web pages. As a result of your visit to our site, ad server companies may collect information such as your domain type, your IP address and click stream information. For further information, consult the privacy policies of:

[google.com...]

General enough to prevent the need for changes, I think...

[maximillianos]

We have turned it off as well for the time being. I'll wait and see what the verdict is before making changes to my privacy policy and notifying my 100,000 registered users of the change.

A side note, as of this morning I've been seeing mostly KFC and diet ads on my site as I browse pages on banking and appliances. From my short-term testing it appears this behavioral targeting is not adding the value the regular contextual ads do.

That is what I like about the contextual ads, they add relevant content to the user's experience.

But I'll let the popular majority decide. If a few months from now the world tells us they really love ads that favor their behavior on the web, then I'll give it a whirl! =)

[carguy84]

as of this morning I've been seeing mostly KFC and diet ads on my site

Those seem to contradict each other :)

Are you an overweight, fast food junkie by any chance? If so, that would be some amazing results. On the one hand, it's giving you an option to change your lifestyle, on the other hand, it's giving you the option to indulge yourself.

Not sure what to think really.

[ken_b]

Have they given any guidance at all about what we need to include as an update to our privacy policy?

[netmeg]

JenSense will be publishing a sample you can use in the next few days; Google her (since I can't put the link in)

I have a boatload of sites I have to oversee for myself and others; I need to come up with a way to have ONE privacy policy file to update that gets displayed everywhere only with different styles depending on the site. Otherwise these changes are a PITA.

[signor_john]

In our site's "privacy policy" page, we state that we don't gather any personal information on users (and that we don't even know HOW to gather such information), but that advertising and affiliate partners may use cookies and other tracking tools. The page also has links to the privacy policies of Google and other advertising partners where users can get more details about what those companies are doing. (I'm a big believer in citations and linking--that's what the Web is all about.)

[fredw]

Meg: That's a GREAT idea! I'm going to implement something like that, too! Thanks!

[sailorjwd]

Whole privacy statement thing on everyone's website is a complete bunch of c*ap. What a pile of horse Sh*t. Who does google think they are? the Congress?

I have no idea what google really does and nor would I really understand it if they told. If someone on my website calls and asks about the advertiser privacy policy I'll have to tell them I have no idea... ask google.

Google should put a privacy link on each ad. It shouldn't be our responsibility.

[IanCP]

Google should put a privacy link on each ad. It shouldn't be our responsibility.

Simple to implement, just below "Ads by Google"

[Publisher1]

I have a simple "one post" Blogger account for the privacy policy, and link to it from all of my websites. Easy to update; using the general guidelines in the Google email, it took me about 5 min to complete the task today.

[AdSenseAdvisor]

I may not be providing tons of additional value here, but you know how I love to point to the Help Center.

Here [google.com] is the article that goes over privacy policies.

Here [google.com] is the list of FAQs on interest-based advertising.

Both of those links are in the email you all received, so please check them out if you haven't already.

ASA

[swa66]

ASA,

Any chance on a clear explanation on what you stop from happening when you opt out ? And exactly what still goes on regardless of opting out ?

[Green_Grass]

Why so much fuss over a change in Privacy Policy?

Didn't we all accept the last change when we agreed to Google, putting doubleclick cookies and webbeacons on users of our sites? They now, already track user behaviour courtesy us, using adSense.

Now all they want to do is USE that info. to serve behaviour targetted ads.. That is a logical extension of what we agreed last time. So why fuss.

[Nicke]

Whats the point to show a user same ads everywhere he go?

I want ads based on MY website, thats why the visditor come to my website in first place and thats the ads I want to show.

[tangor]

Now all they want to do is USE that info. to serve behaviour targetted ads.

Main fuss is that in both the USA and UK such advertising is coming under the eyes of legislators (ie. the guberment!) and other privacy advocates and who knows what may happen if THEY decide to do something?

That said, using Google's Adsense or Adwords requires compliance to their TOS. Their ball park, their rules. Even if one opts out of behavioral targeted... er... interest ads the previous terms apply, which means one must have a privacy statement.

What is interesting overall is the lack of transparency of HOW this new feature may work and what actual benefits accrue to publishers and advertisers, other than google getting more data to mine.

[BeeDeeDubbleU]

No matter how you look at this it is a concern and I don't think it is being very well handled. Am I imagining this or have the privacy policies that ASA points to been changed during the last 24 hours?

[true_INFP]

We have turned it off as well for the time being. I'll wait and see what the verdict is before making changes to my privacy policy and notifying my 100,000 registered users of the change.

Be careful. You are required to update your privacy policy even if you opt out of interest-based ads.

[google.com...]

[true_INFP]

Simple to implement, just below "Ads by Google"

That would be acceptable only if it was optional. We don't need any such redundant clutter.

[leadegroot]

Both of those links are in the email you all received, so please check them out if you haven't already.

Fraid not - no email here, and I have carefully checked the spam folder, as well as where it ought to fall.
Perhaps this is only rolled out across the US atm?

[explorador]

i turned the new feature off

Me too. Find it too intrusive

[Green_Grass]

What intrusive?

We all already agreed to G placing web beacons and doubleclick cookie on our website surfers PC's, in the last update to the privacy policy. So we effectively gave them permission to spy on our visitors long back.. This is nothing new. They will use that info. which they have, to show 'interesting ads'. So again, I wish to know, what has changed to warrant such a strong reaction from all.

Is it fall in revenue that is worrying? But ASA has already clariifed that ads will compete in the same auction as before.

Is it the quality of ads? But that is not guaranteed anyways..

Is it type of ads? They should match content of the website? Why do we worry as long as G can drive conversions for the advertisers. Aren't we selling 'converting' traffic?

What is the objective of our websites? I expect my visitors to convert for advertisers. As long as G can ensure that, why should I worry.

Or is the objective something else?

I feel G has a better idea about how visitors interract with ads and how their purchase decisions are influenced, than we can ever ever, have..Look at the data they have.. and look at what we have..

[carguy84]

But ASA has already clariifed that ads will compete in the same auction as before.

The logic fails in that ads aren't paid on CPM, they're paid based on clicks.

[signor_john]

The logic fails in that ads aren't paid on CPM, they're paid based on clicks.

AdSense CPC ads compete in an auction. They also compete in terms of how well they perform.

[ken_b]

Does anyone actually reads Privacy Policies anyhow?

I just checked my stats for the last month. 1 person visited my Privacy Policy page, and it's linked to from the footer on every one of my pages.

1,000,000+ page views and only 1 page view for the privacy page.

hmmmm..........

Still, I think this whole privacy policy issue is just a way for Google to try and shift responsibility off themselves and on to the publishers.

[johnnie]

Like anybody *reads* your privacy policy. It's all legal mumbo jumbo that G uses to cover its legal behind. Mine has NEVER seen a legit hit.

[freelistfool]

I beleive that the privacy policy changes are to firm up Google's position (and ours) against legal ramifications of what they're calling "interest-based advertising".

I think that interest-based advertising is just an extension of something Google has had in place for over 2 years so turning it off might change your revenue more than leaving it on will. I'm going to leave it on and watch the ads on my site to see if they change significantly for me...and of course watch the revenue.

[Khensu]

Anybody generate a generic policy page yet?

One I can copy, replace and paste?

Like I have time for this drivel.

[eeek]

Like I have time for this drivel.

Indeed! I'm a bit annoyed about being forced to have privacy policies. They seem like something that invites legal problems.

[Scurramunga]

This has now become an annual event!

They seem like something that invites legal problems.

Maybe not our own simple privacy policies , but somebody else's privacy policies could cause this, I agree. Especially when they come with their own set of complex issues.

[edited by: Scurramunga at 12:50 am (utc) on Mar. 24, 2009]

[eeek]

This has now become an annual event!

What has?