Direct: Obama’s FTC Spells Trouble with a Capital T
Mike
· 10 months ago
Holy cow - we're in for some tough years ahead...........hopefully it only lasts for 4.
Jeff Chester
· 10 months ago
Ken: I won't comment on your grasp of political reality. But I should point you to the FTC's new principle governing so-called non-personal information. I suggest you update and revise your analysis. Here's a link and an excerpt from the recent FTC staff opinion: " An IP address is a numerical identifier assigned to a computer or device that connects to the Internet.
Staff believes that, in the context of online behavioral advertising, the traditional notion of what constitutes PII versus non-PII is becoming less and less meaningful and should not, by itself, determine the protections provided for consumer data. Indeed, in this context, the Commission and other stakeholders have long recognized that both PII and non-PII raise privacy issues, a view that has gained even more currency in recent years for a number of reasons. First, depending on the way information is collected and stored, it may be possible to link or merge non-PII with PII...Second, with the development of new and more sophisticated technologies, it likely will become easier to identify an individual consumer based on information traditionally considered to be non-PII. For instance, although industry has traditionally considered most IP addresses to be non-PII, it soon may be possible to link more IP addresses to specific individuals.50" http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2009/02/behavad.shtm
r
· 10 months ago
After reading your piece you seem to think the gov should hire a bunch of political hacks, like the guy who was in charge of disaster control of katrina. maybe he is available to run the ftc.
Troy Scheer
· 10 months ago
Now if Obama would just put as much effort into making sure his people aren't tax cheats we might get somewhere. This country is getting exactly what it asked for. Apathy is going to be the downfall of this country. Let's just let government take over everything because they do such a splendid job with our money.
jackgoldenberg
· 10 months ago
Industry self-regulation never works. Government's getting overly involved doesn't work. We're hurtin'. At least Obama is paying attention and his proactive mentality is far better than the laissez faire attitude of the last White House occupant.
Usually I find your insights to be both entertaining and informative, but this piece is sorely lacking in both. Firstly, you ask us to be frightened of Leibowitz primarily because of things he "reportedly" said or things you "think" he may support. Not great journalism, that. The one (uncited) quote you give us from Leibowitz - “... this could be the last clear chance to show that self-regulation can – and will – effectively protect consumers’ privacy in a dynamic online marketplace” doesn't really sound that scary quite frankly. Why _shouldn't_ we have to prove that we can do what we say we will do? If we don't, then yes - it's time for regulation. Free Markets don't mean a free-for-all when it comes to consumer rights. As someone who champions sound marketing practices, I am surprised to see you shake in your boots over this.
Secondly, you only barely hide your contempt for Democrats, making this seem more of a partisan problem than a business problem. I see in this piece the popular Republican "the sky is falling" attitude when it comes to any discussion of regulation. (Also not great journalism.)
While your basic premise is worth discussion and marketers should take note of the possibilities you raise, I would have preferred to see discussion of alternatives, of the possible benefits that consumer protections do offer, or perhaps some more meaty discussion of actual policies being proposed. I guess that is hard to do when the people you talk about haven't even started their jobs yet. Instead we have a puff piece designed to instigate negative attitudes towards the current administration. Personally I don't think business benefits by taking an adversarial role, but rather we should keep communication lines open, take an active role in shaping policy, and be at the forefront of topics like consumer privacy since we are the ones doing the digging. Whining on the sidelines never got us anywhere.
I hope your next report will show a return to your usual level of quality. This was a poor example.
All Comments
Staff believes that, in the context of online behavioral advertising, the traditional notion
of what constitutes PII versus non-PII is becoming less and less meaningful and should not, by
itself, determine the protections provided for consumer data. Indeed, in this context, the
Commission and other stakeholders have long recognized that both PII and non-PII raise privacy
issues, a view that has gained even more currency in recent years for a number of reasons.
First, depending on the way information is collected and stored, it may be possible to link or
merge non-PII with PII...Second, with the development of new and more sophisticated technologies, it likely will
become easier to identify an individual consumer based on information traditionally considered
to be non-PII. For instance, although industry has traditionally considered most IP addresses to
be non-PII, it soon may be possible to link more IP addresses to specific individuals.50"
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2009/02/behavad.shtm
Jack Goldenberg
ObamaWatches.com
Secondly, you only barely hide your contempt for Democrats, making this seem more of a partisan problem than a business problem. I see in this piece the popular Republican "the sky is falling" attitude when it comes to any discussion of regulation. (Also not great journalism.)
While your basic premise is worth discussion and marketers should take note of the possibilities you raise, I would have preferred to see discussion of alternatives, of the possible benefits that consumer protections do offer, or perhaps some more meaty discussion of actual policies being proposed. I guess that is hard to do when the people you talk about haven't even started their jobs yet. Instead we have a puff piece designed to instigate negative attitudes towards the current administration. Personally I don't think business benefits by taking an adversarial role, but rather we should keep communication lines open, take an active role in shaping policy, and be at the forefront of topics like consumer privacy since we are the ones doing the digging. Whining on the sidelines never got us anywhere.
I hope your next report will show a return to your usual level of quality. This was a poor example.