Self Regulation: Can BT Do a Better Job?

So let's talk about the NAI for a bit. NAI is the Network Advertising Initiative, the group that is defining standards for BT and privacy, and also houses the BT opt out mechanism. The mechanism enables the consumer to opt out of being racked for BT.

I have some positive comments and a peeve or three.

First Positive: Our industry voluntarily put up an opt out site. Remember how tooth and nail the telemarketers fought opt out? OH. MY. GOD. did they lobby against it. Back when Do Not call was an issue, I had a friend in Congress who told me they had NEVER gotten so much mail about anything. Those cards and letters crushed the dinnertime cold call lobby only because Congressmen and Senators genuinely thought the wrong vote would lose them an election.

It took a law to make the Do Not Call happen, and the telemarketing industry had so overstepped the bounds of acceptable business practice that everyone with a browser opted out in about ten seconds after the site when up. Death of an industry, more or less, and THANK BLOODY HELL for that. I spit on your graves, prospector telemarketing kingpins.

So the BT industry put up their site without a law -- indeed to avoid one. But whatever the reason, I'm happy it is up. And generally works.

Second Positive: (After a bit of manual doing) I opted out as an experiment, and the opt out worked. I don't get the cookies anymore. It's as if my McAfee scan gives me an incredulous look when it does its auto scan and finds nary a tracking cookie. It's like the Maytag repairman of 2008. Bravo.

Third Positive: The NAI is putting BT standards together in a very complex space. This isn't simple stuff. My next post is about their proposed standards -- which have been out for public comment for a couple months. I applaud them for trying.

First Peeve: The site is not terribly easy to find, and it's the place people need to go to opt out if they so choose. The site has a Google Page Rank score of 8, which is high, but I type NAI into Google and the site comes up fourth. On Yahoo it is not on the first page. Call me crazy, but an org with the sharpest webbies on the planet could make itself easier to get to. Type "Opt Out of Cookies" and NAI comes up 5th. Type "Behavioral Targeting Opt Out" and the NAI is not on the first page. I don't think that the NAI is deliberately hiding (heck, not if it has a PR of 8,) but part of being a responsible self regulation org is making yourself easily available to consumers. Look, the world is give and take. I am not suggesting the NAI OEM a widget with the title "You want to opt out, don't you?" with a Big Brother picture above it, but an org of the biggest web smarties in the universe can make a site that is easier to find than this. I mean, search NAI on Yahoo and it's not on the first page???

Second Peeve: That bit that so many web publishers are saying about consumers enjoying the Internet more because of targeted ads. Well, sample size of one, but that is a load of crap in my experience. I opted out to see how different my Internet experience would be. Frankly I didn't notice one at all. OK, actually I perceived that I saw more Mortgage snake state banners, which seems logical given that mortgage DR is total bottom feeder untargeted sub a buck CPM crap. Net net, selling consumers on the idea that the internet is a magical experience because of targeted banners -- it just ain't believable. Or true, come to that. And please spare me comments about the surveys that say people prefer targeted banners. Yadda yadda. It's crap and you know it. In fairness, there is nary a mention of this on the actual NAI site, but it is a common message coming from members. It is on page one of their proposed standards doc.

Third Peeve: When I went to opt out, I had to fill in which ad networks I wanted to opt out of by ticking 16 boxes saying I want to opt of 16 networks. I find this silly. What is the consumer REALISTICALLY going to do. Surmised internal dialogue of Mabel in Decatur: "Well, I want to opt out of Advertising.com, but those nice people at ValueClick, I think I will keep their cookies." Again, I don't think this is deliberate barrier creation, but it strikes me that some consumers might THINK they were being put through hoops. Which is not a good thought to provoke if you are trying to head off regulation.

Fourth Peeve: Even when I tick the 16 boxes, I got an error message that for some reason I am not opted out of a couple of the networks and need first try again (didn't work) and then go to their sites to finish the job. Hello! A faulty app is NOT my problem. That is not a good consumer experience. Opt out either works or it doesn't. If for some reason it is actually difficult to make a perfect opt out mechanism, I say work it out, because it's either make it work or have the feds order you to.

So, in sum, I applaud the efforts of NAI to self regulate. I just think they need to step up the game just a bit. While as a citizen I am not opposed to government regulation of any industry, I fear the sort of regulation that may come from our government because so far at least I am totally unimpressed by their understanding of the Internet. Ignorance does not begat good law.

If you've read two posts on this blog you'll know that I think BT (at least the traditional ad network sort) is just fine, and that it is essential to pay for the web. But advertisers are always suspect in the eyes of consumers. We need to prove we are worthy of their trust. NAI can help, and is helping. I just think it could help more.