The Mind and The Heart

First published on iMediaConnection.com

Working at the intersection of marketing and technology makes for a dynamic and exciting time most every day. But one of the unfortunate consequences of living in a technical age is that most people in the industry try to fact their brands into leadership and differentiation. Facts are great, and can be (but are not always) necessary for long term differentiation. But where are the digital brands? And by brands I mean the offerings that make you feel as much as they make you think.

The thought came to me as I was developing a presentation about social networks and how the business has changed over the years. And as I made my slides, I got to thinking that perhaps part of the reason why so many once mega colossal digital properties have died quick deaths is that they have focused all their efforts on communicating attributes. Now, I don’t dispute that attributes can and should help govern who wins and who bites it. But surely there is a place for both reason and feeling.

Why did Friendster fall from grace so quickly? Well, the rational answer was that it took like 20 minutes to load a page. But perhaps there was more. Perhaps part of it was because Friendster never touched us emotionally. MySpace brought so many of us into the world of social media, but many people shifted away just as soon as there were other options. Again, there were rational reasons. Like trying to load a page and being greeted with glitter and a slow loading song and garish graphics and and and. But again, I suspect there was an emotional void where the brand essence was supposed to be. And hey, they still have more than 200 million users, so they may yet return as a dominant player. It’ll take some product changes. But I believe it’ll take kindling some brand love as well.

The premise works far beyond social networks. Why is it that Yahoo has endured where Excite and Lycos and Netscape and all the rest declined precipitously? Of course there were rational reasons, notleast their email dominance. But Yahoo also gave and gives you something to like. You aren’t a user, you’re a Yahoo. Your kid isn’t a user, she is a Yahooligan. I believe that kind of personality and emotional connection is a key to why Yahoo is the 900(0) pound gorilla while other sites ebb.

Sample size of one, I LOVE Yahoo. I stick with them in part because I feel a part of a movement or a club with Yahoo. I once wrote a love letter to Yahoo and meant every word. I make no money from them. They are not a client. I am not an investor. But I friggin’ love that brand. My suspicion is that the younger set may not have that same feeling for the brand. Perhaps it’s time for some emotional marketing again. But in the meantime, I stick with them even when other sites develop whizbang new features. I have faith that Yahoo will get around to those same innovations quickly, and in the meantime, I can still think of myself as a Yahoo.

My brilliant coworker Nirali has a deep bond with Google. Like any good analyst, she explains her love in rational terms. By I see the twinkle in her eye when she talks about the big G and I know it’s also about what the brand stands for – consumer first, respect, accuracy, and a geeky sense of humor. Like the day they swapped out their logo with the word Topeka to celebrate their alliance with that city. That was pure class, and hits you in the heart instead of the mind.

What other brands have that kind of emotional side? Not many. Twitter flirts with it, with their funny little bird and their dedication to honesty and user empowerment. And that emotional side may have helped them weather the 9 million service outages that plagued their meteoric growth.

Apple has it.

Bing has some emotional oomph too. Emotional branding is a particular struggle for a software company. I think that the Bing people need to ask themselves, “In 12 months, what should people feel when they use Bing?” Are they rebels fighting Google hegemony? Are they the bold new upstart spirit of a new MSFT? Does using Bing make them feel brilliant? Cool? Confident? Inspired?"

That kind of emotional bond builds loyalty, and helps brands weather stormlike periods when new companies and arch competitors come up with things first. It also helps hold the eyeballs when they make a mistake. Because we forgive the errors of the ones we love. But when rational machines screw up, we scrap them and buy something new.

So I ask you, what does your brand make people feel? Ten years from now, will you have users writing your brand love letters?

Savage AntiMicrosoft Parody: Score One For Cupertino

Microsoft Remains Zuney

Hollywood Reporter is...reporting...that Microsoft remains committed to the Zune brand despite a 54% sales drop in holiday sales versus the previous year.

From their article:

Zune revenue falls 54% in fourth quarter
Microsoft remains committed to brand, spokesman says
By Antony Bruno, Billboard
Jan 26, 2009, 04:05 PM ET
DENVER -- It seems that Microsoft's Zune just can't catch a break. Despite a holiday ad blitz and introduction of new services -- including a feature that lets subscribers keep 10 free songs a week -- revenue for the Zune division fell 54% in the fourth quarter from the previous year.That's a drop of about $100 million, according to a recent Microsoft regulatory filing. However, a company spokesman said any rumors pointing to the demise of the brand or the service are patently false. The company remains firmly behind the Zune music strategy.

While Microsoft won't break down exactly how it is divvying up the 5,000 layoffs it announced last week, some in the Zune group are expected to be affected, but not more than any other division. That the Zune division remains intact after such a massive workforce reduction indicates the company's dedication to the strategy remains intact.However, expect some changes in the year ahead. Microsoft has always been more of a software/services company than a hardware one, despite the anomaly of the Xbox. Company executives, including CEO Steve Ballmer, said to look for an expansion of the Zune service into other Microsoft-run products like the Windows Mobile technology for mobile phones, and at some point into the Xbox Live Marketplace.

Thanks for reading, and don't forget to write.

iMedia Summit Monday Recap

I am not a gloom and doom person and frankly am weary of conventional wisdom overshoot in our industry. I mean, if growth rates fall below 50% per quarter people get all jittery. It’s gonna be alright, people.  Take it from someone who’s been in advertising through three recessions and the dot bomb. And 37 rounds of layoffs in his life. Really! It’ll be OK, guys and gals!

As reassurance, I wanted to combat some of the black veils and eulogies being put forth of late to provide a list of nine things that made me more optimistic about the industry. All coming out of today’s iMedia Summit sessions, in the order they occurred at the show:

9. 24-7 Real Media gave a thought provoking presentation on how technology continues to drive a revolution in the ability of digital media to meet the precise needs of brands. Their perspective on what is happening in the ad network space was interesting and gave me pause. What’s more, their message and tone was realistically optimistic – that there will be fallout from the downturn but that there is no reason why the smart leaders of our industry cannot continue to grow and prosper – and grow stronger BECAUSE of the scarcity of resources and the weaning of weaker concepts and opportunities. 24-7 is a frequent sponsor of iMedia, so special props for that as well.

8. NBCU always has great things to say and says them in a clear and powerful way. Some of their new offerings – including customized audiences across the various NBC properties – offer interesting new opps for advertisers to seriously consider. Also, they have a new roadblock offering that offers an alternative to portal front page takeovers. Having more roadblocking and massive reach opps like these, across leading web properties, bodes well for the future of our medium because it helps us deliver greater value and present credible alternatives to clients.

7. Today’s keynote from Don Epperson, CEO of Havas Digital, offered a compelling vision for the future of agencies as – in a very real sense – data driven brand networks. For years agencies have been talking about creating data warehouses for brands – Havas’s vision is to layer on an auction based ad valuation model for its clients that places the focus on the consumer reached rather than the gif blinked. A focus on individual consumers has always been a cornerstone of digital, so this massive initiative offers a vision for the future you should definitely check out. You can agree or disagree with their approach, but you cannot doubt how strategically driven his message really is.

6. One Minute MatchUps: Some attendees groan about this part of the program, but I love it. The idea of one minute matchups is to give agencies and pubs/nets the opportunity to meet about 60 people in a single hour – to talk about what they are doing and get a Reader’s Digest version of what’s on offer. I absolutely love hearing a good salesperson do their pitch, even more so when they can effectively distill a massive offering of content, creative options and targeting technologies into an 18 second sentence. At the end of the show I am going to send out special shouts to the people I thought were rocking sellers, but overall I was impressed by the messages this year – both in their succinctness and in the attempt by many to make a 1 minute pitch a consultative sell. Dat takes mad skilz.

5. Microsoft Advertising’s al fresco cocktail hour offered another great opp for networking. And it makes me happy to be around so many people who are optimistic about the future of the business. I always appreciate companies that sponsor events like this because they are really the engine to collaboration in the industry.

4. Weatherbug’s beach themed dinner offered opps to meet and talk with more (optimistic) people, and to hear a really good band play a plethora of songs I actually knew the words to. Those in the industry should take (positive) note that the fact that the third song they performed was Brick House indicates that this is no longer just an industry of wide eyed 23 year olds. Welcome to wrinkles, iMedia. Just think of them as nooks and crannies to hold the wisdom.

When I know all the songs, you know you’re getting old, people. But remember the motto of my personal blog, “Old is the new black.”

3. The Hoover’s after hours reception was (I am told, 9:30PM is my bedtime) a rocking good time. Hoovers has really increased their prominence in the planning and buying arena with sponsorships of iMedia and other events. It’s not right for every brand but there’s nothing like Hoovers for the brands it clicks with.

2. I got to talk with about a dozen people starting new companies, which I think is a great sign that our future is bright. Over the next several months I’ll be doing little Q&As with some of these people and running them here at iMedia Connection.

1. Infectious optimism really made me feel great all day. And made me, for a time, forget about missing my little pup, Sleepy, who is, even as you read this, stamping his foot and wearing a little disgusted grimace. See, he’s at doggie day care back in O-Town wondering when I am going to come home and throw his ball.

Soon, Sleepers, Soon!

Thanks for reading, and don't forget to write.

Apple Versus MSFT: 40-Love

Microsoft's Small Basic: Launching a New Generation of Programmers - Literally

My interest in computers was launched, oddly enough, byt the basic programming language. With it I wrote a spelling program that was used by a teacher friend of my Moms -- for 17 years. The secret? I flatter myself that I invented digital bling -- you cannot IMAGINE the horror of colors and graphics that displayed when the user got the spelling right for a word.

But enough of my self flattery. Let me let ReadWriteWeb provide the rationale for Microsoft's new, simplified version of Basic.

After a year in the making, and with very little fanfare, Microsoft last month launched Small Basic, a free programming language aimed at kids. Unlike Scratch and Alice, tools designed for kids to learn programming in a 'codeless' environment, Small Basic is essentially a small version of the BASIC language.

BASIC has undergone many changes since its inception 40 years ago and while its growth has made it more powerful and capable, it has also become almost overwhelming for a beginner. Even though Small Basic is primarily aimed at children, it just may be the ideal way for anyone interested in programming to dip their feet in the water.

And here's how MSFT describes it:

Small Basic is a project that's aimed at bringing "fun" back to programming. By providing a small and easy to learn programming language in a friendly and inviting development environment, Small Basic makes programming a breeze. Ideal for kids and adults alike, Small Basic helps beginners take the first step into the wonderful world of programming.

Small Basic derives its inspiration from the original BASIC programming language, and is based on the Microsoft .Net platform. It is really small with just 15 keywords and uses minimal concepts to keep the barrier to entry as low as possible.

The Small Basic development environment is simple, yet provides powerful modern environment features like Intellisense™ and instant context sensitive help.

Small Basic allows third-party libraries to be plugged in with ease, making it possible for the community to extend the experience in fun and interesting ways.

I love this idea - by making computing more accessible, there will be an explosion of interest in programming -- the sort of thing that means additional creativity in the years ahead.

Thanks for reading, and don't forget to write.

Microsoft Drops Live Mouse Out Of Plane To Sell Pointing Devices

If it's a fake it's a good one. And if it is real, I'm sending $30 to PETA. Cuz it's just plain WRONG.



Thanks for reading, and don't forget to write.

Apple v. MSFT Ad War Score: 30-Love

It's like the Cola Wars all over again! Just don't say the v word.

WIN 7: Early Press is Good!

I generally like what Gizmodo has to say -- I feel as though they take a largely objective view of both existing technologies and the newest chiny new things. SO I was happy to read their positive assessment of Windows 7.

According to this piece, Windows 7 will be faster, more stable, more intuitive, and just plain more sensible than Vista. And I LIKED Vista and continue to, though I am well aware of some of its shortcomings.

Faster boot up. Vista was already somewhat of an improvement on this score, and apparently 7 is better still.

Control of the things you see and the notifications you get. Bravo.

A Library Approach: Not my term, but I like the analogy. The idea is that you can clump like files together and store them separately which Gizmodo points out is sort of the opposite of the Apple philosophy.

Digital Home Hub: The offering clearly is designed to help you more easily manage more devices and operations. Definitely a good thing.

The Gizmodo conclusion offers an analogy that I really liked:

For now, we should just be happy that Windows 7 appears to be on the right track. You can almost look at consumer-level Windows—that is, 95, 98, Me, XP, Vista and Win 7—like the first six Star Trek movies: They pretty reliably alternate between crap and quality. All I can say is, screw the Final Frontier, and hellloooo, Undiscovered Country. That, and thanks to Microsoft for talking about Windows 7 early and often. It helps. Just don't screw it up!

Thanks for reading, and don't forget to write.

The New Windows WIll Be Called...7???

"To heck with it. Just call it Product 19."

Aw jeez, just decide...or I will. I christen thee "Formula 409."

I imagine those words having been said in conference rooms at Kellogg's and Clorox respectively when the products described above were but gleams in a marketer's eye.

So, Tech Crunch had a post yesterday where they unveiled that the new edition of Windows will be called...

...drumroll please...

Windows 7.

A very logical addiiton to a family line that goes (to the best of my recollection...


Windows 1
Windows 2
Windows 3.1
Windows NT
Windows 95
Windows 98
Windows 2000
Windows XP
Windows Vista

So clearly 7 is the next logical thing.

As Grandma used to say, "You can tell a lot about a person's mind by what they put on their jelly jars.

Thanks for reading, and don't forget to write.

Apple: Always a Step Ahead

So, just when MSFT launches its new compaign, which I reviewed yesterday, Mac is out there doing amazing new ads online. Amazing. Check this out -- a video of their NYT ad unit last week. Remarkable:



I like the new camapign for MSFT, but it seems pretty clear to me that Mac ain't gonna roll over. It's easier, after all to reinforce a positioning than to create a new one.

Thanks for reading, and don't forget to write.

I'm a PC Too! New Microsoft Campaign Gets On The Dart Board

The Apple I'm a Mac I'm a PC campaign has been running for years, and it is one powerful ad campaign. Not only have they reinforced the hip factor on Mac, something he brand always had, it also succeeded in positioning the competition -- Microsoft --as a fat, bumbling idiot.

I think the campaign has been so successful that it has affected media coverage -- portraying the entire MSFT company -- whatever product, except PERHAPS XBox -- as a doddering and inept entry living by its supposed hegemony.

So I was pleasantly surprised by the new I'm a PC campaign, which directly addresses the stereotype by showing the profound range of people who use the operating system that powers, after all, 96% or so of machines worldwide.

Have a look:





It is perhaps odd for number one to respond to number 2 in advertising, but I think they were able to do it without DIRECTLY addressing Apple, at least by name.

I like it. It's a little sledgehammer to the head "we are repositioning ourselves," but whatever. It needed to be done.

Thanks for reading, and don't forget to write.

Seinfeld and Gates - New Family Ad

The new ad in the Microsoft campaign is a lot like booting up Windows. It takes four and a half minutes, yet seemingly for no reason.



Actually, ya'll know I like Windows, and was excited about the idea of Seinfeld for Windows. But this is really pointless selfindulgence.

Google Video for Enterprise: WIll THIS Be The Ticket to YouTube Monetization

ReadWriteWeb is reporting that Google is adding a video application to its fast growing Google Apps line. The application appears to borrow a great deal from the YouTube platform, which makes a lot of sense and may offer a great way to finally monetize that ginormous purchase.

What's most interesting here to me is that this is clearly aimed at the enterprise market. Google offerings have traditionally offered a good alternative for Mom and Pops and perhaps medium sized businesses, while Redmond continued to have a strong lock on enterprise. But those days may be numbered as this adds important functionality to its already popular apps suite.

So...you might ask, why would an enterprise need video for internal consumption? Well, need is a matter of interpretation, and ReadWriteWeb says this is intended for company presentations, team sharing, and the like.

Is there nothing that Google won't offer?

Perhaps not, but while I think this offering is a good idea, I have to think that at some point Google's priorities will be so broad that the company will lose focus and leadership in some sectors. Companies do not grow and win forever. Witness:

Swift meats was the largest company at the end of the 19th century. It is now a division of a Brazilian meatpacker.

ToysRUs was widely expected to have near monopoly on toys ad inifinitum. Now they struggle against WalMart and Target.

AOL...well you get the picture.

In a world as wild as the web, one cannot stay on top forever.

Thanks for reading, and don't forget to write.

Search Shares - Google Up Again in July

Google share of Search has grown again. Right out of Yahoo and MSN's hide. Not good for our friends in Sunnyvale and Redmond!



Thanks for reading, and don't forget to write.

Another View of the New Seinfeld Campaign for Vista.

Another view of the Seinfeld Vista campaign. From Venture Beat.

Jerry Signs With Vista. Alas No George, Kramer, or Elaine

Jerry Seinfeld has signed to do the advertising for the upcoming wave of support for Vista. The estimated $300 Million campaign will be the follow on to the online campaign currently running that leverages the old chestnut of the Folger's Crystals campaign.

I have not seen the campaign but love the idea of Jerry doing this. He is funny, highly credible, and has a reputation for being quite the exacting fella.

And also, I like Vista so it is nice it is getting a second shot -- with $300 Million it'll be QUITE a second shot indeed!

Thanks for reading, and don't forget to write.

Imperfect Synopsis (Not a Transcript): Senate Commerce Hearing on Privacy Implications of Online Advertising

Yesterday the US Senate Commerce Committee held a 1.75 hour hearing on privacy and online advertising. There to testify were NebuAd, MSFT, Google, FaceBook, Center for Democracy and Technology, and Competitive Enterprise Institute.

I wasn't there, of course, but did watch the entire webcast (twice -- I know, what a policy wonk I am,) and am going to both report on the happenings and give interpretations based upon those viewings.

Hey, I am not a reporter, but I am going to do my best to report rather than editorialize.

By no means is this a transcript. Rather, I am trying to summarize the gist because I don't think many people will watch the vid or read a transcript and because hearings like this are absolutely critical to the future of the industry and the shape it will take.

-----

Broadly, the purpose of the hearing was to determine whether more government oversight and regulation is required to protect consumer privacy. ISPs were invited to attend, but decided not to. Apparently there will be a future hearing of ISPs only.

Lydia Parnes, Director of the Bureau for Consumer Protection of the FTC, began the hearing with a prepared statement that noted that they have been examining BT for a long time and with particular concern over PII, health, and financial information.

FTC Lydia Parnes reviewed the FTC's past Town Hall on BT and privacy, and the three key findings:

1. BT may provide value to consumers.
2. BT raises privacy concerns and concerns about
3. Everyone believes in transparency and some level of consumer control.

Based upon the Town Hall and their past research, the FTC has four key beliefs about BT and how it should be conducted.

1. Companies that collect info should disclose the practice and let people choose. Note: the FTC has, in the past and currently, has found either opt-in or opt-out as acceptable for "non-sensitive, non PII info.
2. Companies must provide reasonable security and retain data only as long as necessary.
3. If companies want to use data in a way other than disclosed in 1., they must get consumer permission to do so (opt-in.)
4. Sensitive data (e.g., health) should only be collected on an opt-in basis.

FTC says it is "cautiously optimistic" about the ability for self regulation to do the job of offering consumer protection.

From there, they went to Jane Horvath, the Senior Privacy Counsel for Google.

Ms. Horvath said that Google always puts their users first. That users can with one click switch providers if they are dissatisfied with Google's privacy policies, so they must put their users first to protect consumer loyalty.

She then reviewed the economic and consumer value of BT.

She continued to say that three privacy design fundamentals drive everything at Google:

1. Transparency: She said they are very active in educating consumers about their privacy via the Google Privacy Channel on YouTube, among other means.
2. Choice: She said consumers have the option of what data is made available. She pointed to the off the record feature on GoogleTalk as an example.
3. Security: She also said they have incredibly intense security for data at Google.

She also said that Google targeting is primarily context- versus behavior-based.

They recommended the following:

1. Google supports establishing a comprehensive Federal privacy law with uniform standards and penalties.
2. Google supports FTC's efforts at developing principles/standards with industry.
3. Display ads should be better labeled.

Then she showed a video that explains how to remove cookies from a browser. The video is from their privacy YouTube channel. It was an example of their proactive approach to education.

Bob Dykes, CEO of NebuAd, was next. He outlined his own security background. He then reviewed their standards that he said ensure that no one can derive PII from their system.

He said that consumers significantly benefit from more relevant ads while they get robust privacy protections. BT also provides economic value to small web sites and ISPs.

He stressed anonymity and how important it is to their system.

The outline of his privacy foundation principles was as follows:

1. Prior robust notice about the service.
2. Time to choose whether to opt out and ongoing opps to opt out.
3. No PII.
4. Do not store raw data linked to identifiable individuals.
5. High data security.

He then said that those who claimed that they do not require robust notice or an opportunity to opt out are wrong. That those are central to their model. He also said that those who claim that they traffic everything are incorrect.

He further stated that they do not track:

1. Webmail
2. Email
3. IM
4. VOIP traffic
5. Info about password Protected Sites

as well as some other web traffic.

He said that their standards have been vetted by the Panama Institute and that they are engaging with a Big Four accounting firm to audit the veracity of their statements.

He then said that NebuAd supports the past privacy paradigm promulgated by the Committee.

Next up was Leslie Harris, President and CEO of the Center for Democracy and Technology.

She began by stating that their POV/argument centered on three points and several recommendations.

1. BT is growing and consumers are uncomfortable with it and don't have the tools to control their info. Aggregation on non PII can result in reverse engineering PII. There is a lack of transparency and meaningful controls. She said 59% of people are not comfortable with BT according to a recent poll.
2. ISP targeting adds consumer and legal concerns. That an ISP MAY give access to info on everything one does online to a third party. That consumers do not want traffic intercepted by an ISP and given to a third party. They also believe that the law requires prior opt in versus opt out. ISP targeting has not done this.
3. Self regulation is not enough. NAI is a failure. And only now that the FTC and the Senate have demonstrated concern has the NAI responded with modest improvements. Additional legislation is required.

She then made the following recommendations.

1. More hearings necessary on ISP targeting and sensitive info.
2. Need privacy legislation.
3. FTC needs to issue enforceable guidelines.
4. Do not track list should be offered.

Chris Kelly, CPO of FaceBook was next. He said that privacy is a foundation of the network. Specifically:

1. Consumers have the power of choice in who they share with and what communities they join and what info they share.
2. They are transparent in how they use info to serve relevant ads.

Specifically:

1. He said FaceBook is very focused on letting consumers choose. That default settings are high on the privacy meter. You choose what info to include and not include in profiles, and with whom you share your info.
2. You should have access to info others want to share.

He said controls are built into every aspect of FaceBook. That they offer easy to use tools to control personal info. They've created a lock icon to indicate that users can control info disclosure.

He also stated that ad targeting on FB is non-PII. That they make that clear in their policies and communicate the idea that targeting has value to consumers.

Next up was Clyde Wayne Cruz, Jr., VP Policy at the Competitive Enterprise Institute. He began by saying privacy will become a bigger issue in the future because of incredible new technologies on the horizon.

He said that it's very difficult to legislate privacy online because consumers have different wants and needs and because the environment is extremely complex and constantly changing.

He posited that firms alter info handling without law, so law is unnecessary. That consumers, and especially online, get to choose, and that that is a better force for regulation.

He said a lot more here about cyber crime and a variety of other issues but I am going to focus on the BT relevant stuff.

Finally, Mike Hintze, Associate General Counsel at Microsoft went. He reiterated the value of advertising online and how targeting was important to paying for the web and in tailoring online experiences.

He said that MSFT cares deeply about privacy. That they have done more than anyone else in the industry on this score. That they have a robust set of internal standards to govern privacy.

Last July, they issued MSFT standards revolving around:

1. Transparency - Clear link to privacy on every page of their sites and with simple and precise policies.
2. Control - Consumers can opt out and tie the opt out to the Live online account so that databases are not rebuilt as with cookie deletion.
3. Choice - MSFT uses anonymized identifier to disconnect PII from actions.

He said they recommend a federal privacy law and self regulation. They also work hard to educate consumers.

From here the hearing went to questions. I don't know the senators by sight and the super on the webcast obscured their name tags, so I am going to focus on the questions rather than the askers.

AGAIN, THIS IS NOT A TRANSCRIPT! I AM TRYING TO DO A DETAILED SUMMARY BUT THESE ARE MY INTERPRETATIONS OF WHAT THEY SAID, NOT WHAT THEY ACTUALLY SAID!

First question to NebuAd: What is the difference between NebuAd and wiretapping?

Dykes: I am not a lawyer, but NebuAd has a legal memo they will share attesting to their view that they are well within the law. The info collected is non PII. That all info is collected using anonymous identifiers and the data are relevant only inasmuch as they classify people into target groups, that page level data is not stored nor can they connect PII to the data using their system.

Question: This wouldn't be operable as an opt-in model, right?

Harris: Our wiretap laws don't require the collection of PII to be enforced. Also, while they may not be using all the info, they are collecting all the info.

Dykes: Only certain info is used and that is not stored. Only the category that someone falls into is stored. The rest is ignored and also not stored. And consumers can opt out, are offered robust notice, and they do opt out.

Question to FaceBook: Do 3rd party app providers have access to all info in user profiles?

Kelly: A user must actively add the app and acknowledge that they are collecting info. Then the app maker can request data but will only receive the data that the user has consented to share on FB. Then the app maker can only retain the info for 24 hours. If they violate this the app can be shut down.

Question: What is the best estimate of the degree of use of this info abusively -- beyond BT?

Harris: No one knows and there are no rules in place to control it. NAI members have made a commitment, but lots of companies are not in the NAI.

Dykes: As a result of abuses with AOL Search data in 2004 - when it became clear than non-PII data could be reconstructed into PII if associated with individuals, however anonymized, NebuAd wanted to avoid the risk. Their approach of bucketizing users into segments mitigates the risk. The bucket is stored, not all the data that put someone in the bucket. They resolved never to keep raw data that had the potential to create abuse. They don't have it or keep it. No data is connected to PII, only to anonymoized info.

Question: Would ensuring that all of this collection of data is made anonymous solve the problem of potential abuse?

Harris: You can't entirely mitigate the risk. When AOL made search data available, it took very little time to construct PII from it.

Dykes: In the case of AOL. certain kinds of info made it possible to interpolate PII like specific real estate searches that made it possible to identify people. But NebuAd stores the segments, not the specific data.

Harris: But profiling poses that risk. That profiles COULD include that. That for example if you search for your name you are essentially revealing PII.

Dykes: Which is why they don't store info like that. It is irrelevant to the model.

Question: Is true anonymity possible?

Dykes: I believe so.

Question: Is any legitimate benefit to consumers sacrificed by true anonymity.

Dykes: We chose not to collect PII.

Cruz: You're always taking a little risk online. The Internet is not a secure environment. Also, we're not going to WANT pure anonymity. Crime is always possible on an open network like the web. No guarantees possible online. We can try our best but there will always be risk.

Question: What would Federal law or principles entail?

Harris: We don't need a BT law, we need a privacy law. It's bigger than BT. There should be rules about transparency, time limits, opt out or opt in based upon the sensitivity. It's a complicated topic but technology shouldn't govern the basic principles of privacy. We don't want a law that freezes tech development. It's all a matter of balance.

Hintze: We need a national privacy law. We need to harmonize all the federal and state laws. Consuemrs need a common baseline protection.

Dykes: The law needs to focus on privacy. But it must also be careful not to stifle competition.

Harris: Companies stand in different positions to the consumer and we need to take that into account.

Question: Is there a way to approach this where we would govern the type of Internet connection used instead of the content?

Harris: Our laws are outdated. The potential risks are there, and the info would also be available to the government. That is a key danger. For example, email privacy has very little legal protection.

Question: Do you believe consumers are entitled to opt-in?

Harris: It depends on data and context. ISP yes because it is the center connection. It's complicated. PII and non PII are starting to merge. The risk is that an anonymous ID can be connected to PII. We need a baseline privacy bill.

Question: Has the FTC studied security -- storage and encryption?

Parnes: Data security is part of our principles as is the idea that data is stored only as long as necessary.

Question: Do you know everything I do online if I use your site, Google and MSFT?

Horvath: If you're signed in on Google, we know your searches, but not what you did off our site. It's only connected to IP addresses.

Question: How long do you keep records?

Horvath: 18 months.
Hintze: 18 months.

Question: If NebuAd comes to you and asks for a contract -- give us everything you have -- would you consider it?

Hintze: We aren't sharing that info with anyone.
Dykes: We don't want such data. We only use data to put people into innocuous categories.

Question: Does competition between sites protect consumers? Are sites competing or going to compete with privacy standards?

Harris: No There is not enough consumer understanding. Also, companies store the data for too long and anonymization is not as simple as it sounds.

Dykes: Not sure Harris understands what NebuAd actually does. Would like to calrify after the hearing with her.

Question: Summarize your points.

Harris: There are great benefits from advertising but companies are collecting more, increasingly personal info. Self regulation is good but not enough. We need a baseline privacy law.

Kelly: We are at the forefront. We only know what people decide to share. And if companies want to target using that info, advertiser does not get PII.

Dykes: We welcome regulation about privacy. Focus on the sensitivity of the type of info. Strong controls are necessary but room should be left for innovation. Self regulation will also be important.

Cruz: We need to worry about criminals - self regulation doesn't help us there. But law can stifle. We need to let the market evolve. We don't want to impede that.

Hintze: Must protect consumer privacy. If we don't we will undermine the business model. Microsoft leads but we are a small player in online advertising. We need legislation plus self regulation.

Parnes: We need baseline privacy legislation to give consumers assurance, plus we believe in self regulation.

-----

Well, there is my non transcript. If it had value for you I am happy. If you disagree with the interpretation of my summary anywhere, please say so and I will note your disagreement in the post. I did my best to get the gist.

I'm going to give my impressions of the info and its import this weekend in another post. Until then...

Thanks for reading, and don't forget to write.