Behavioral advertising, the anonymous or pseudonymous tracking of online activities for purposes of providing more targeted advertising and content, promises great potential for advertisers and publishers to build more relevant and trusting experiences for their users. But if you are thinking about using social or behavioral advertising because traditional display and email are yielding deplorably low response rates - don’t cross that fine line between creeping in and creeping out. Currently, consumers are unhappy with behavioral targeting practices, and now legislatures are getting involved. The New York State Assembly has plans to impose legal restrictions on the ways in which personal data is collected and used.

In line with the proposed New York State bill, a recent consumer poll conducted by TRUSTe and TNS Global indicates consumer demand for more transparency and user control around behavioral targeting. The survey provides insight into how marketers can make behavioral targeting more welcoming from a consumer perspective. Finding the right balance between wowing customers with superior customization and simply freaking them out will preserve consumer trust and help prevent state and federal legislation from curtailing your marketing plans for 2008.
Much of the evidence collected in the TRUSTe and TNS survey points to a consumer demand for more customized online ads and for an end to irrelevant, untargeted ads most commonly observed today.
• 87 percent reveal that fewer than 25 percent of the ads they see today are of any relevance.
• 72 percent of consumers find online advertising to be intrusive and annoying when ads are irrelevant to their interests.
• 64 percent say they would prefer to see only ads from online stores and brands they know and trust.
• 55 percent would be willing to fill out an anonymous survey about products, services, and brands they purchase in order to limit the online ads they see to those indicated in the survey.

But, according to survey results, two main obstacles threaten the promise of behavioral targeting: 1) the lack of consumer education and understanding, and 2) the lack of transparency and affirmative choice. Consumers indicate a high level of apprehension when it comes to tracking their browsing history and express little familiarity with the term “behavioral targeting.”
• 57 percent of survey respondents say they are uncomfortable with advertisers using their browsing history to provide relevant ads
• Only 40 percent of respondents are familiar with the term “behavioral targeting.”

While advertising based on anonymous information should be embraced by privacy sensitive individuals, there is still significant unease with behavioral techniques. This is not surprising when consumers are familiar with privacy mishaps such as the AOL search data disclosure, which allowed researchers to piece together several pieces of anonymous information to positively identify an individual. Seventy one percent of consumers said they were uncomfortable with third parties tracking their behavior for purposes of serving ads even when it couldn’t be tied with any PII.

Behavioral Advertising Dos and Don’ts

DO
- Matter-of-factly incorporate some disclosure of tracking and targeting as part of your product or service value proposition. Provide a “what is this” button to explain how your customization works.
- Make sure your service providers, agencies, and others are following industry standards for privacy notice and disclosure. The majority of serious complaints TRUSTe encounters are privacy breaches by marketing vendors.

DON’T
- Think you can get away with not giving your customers notice and choice. See Cathryn Harris v. Blockbuster.
- Undermine your investment in building your brand for a few response points. (more…)

Bookmark It

Hide Sites

If you’re an events manager with a death wish, invite Jason Calacanis to deliver the keynote address at your next conference. Sure, Calacanis—a serial Internet entrepreneur who made the bulk of his fortune with the sale of his company Weblogs, Inc. to AOL—will deliver an engaging, thought-provoking and sometimes flat-out inspirational talk. But then again, he might just start a riot.

After all, this is the guy who, at SES Chicago in 2006, announced—to a group of search professionals—that “SEO is bullshit!” and compared those engaging in SEO to “snake oil salesmen.”

It didn’t go over well.

Having escaped Chicago, living to speak another day, Calacanis recently addressed a room full of affiliate marketers at the Affiliate Summit West. Apparently unruffled by the flap and furor over his SEO comments, Calacanis explained to the affiliate folks that the rest of the industry saw them as the bottom rung of the food chain, wired to make the quick buck.

There was no standing ovation.

But to be fair to Calacanis, he’s not some sort of egomaniacal misanthrope who gets a perverse pleasure out of standing on a stage and belittling the audience. (Actually, he might just take a little pleasure in it.) In fact, the point he’s trying to make is a valid and intriguing one.

First of all, Calacanis was over-generalizing for effect: he sees value in ethical SEO and understands that there are legitimate best practices to follow in designing, maintaining and promoting a site that will allow it to rank higher in search results. And he certainly doesn’t see anything wrong with the fundamental concept of affiliate marketing: engaging a group of websites to help sell product or generate leads as a sort-of extended sales force.

Calacanis has a problem with those interested in gaming the system to make a quick buck—whether it’s the black-hat SEO firm that exploits a weakness in a search engine algorithm to garner a temporary high rank for an undeserving website (until the search engine closes the loophole and the site plummets off the search results page) or the affiliate who steals content to game the search engines to generate more traffic and commissions, or the marketer who floods blogs, message boards and social networks with paid posts.

According to Calacanis, it’s all borne out of a misguided ethic that has pervaded the Internet since the mid-’90s: if one is technically capable of doing something, then it’s OK.

But he—and others—see reason for optimism. As more and more black-hat marketers exploit the various systems, these systems eventually break down, to be replaced by ones that are more resistant to gaming. Consumers are helping to drive change, too. We leave MySpace to go to Facebook and then to LinkedIn as policing technologies are developed that help eliminate spam or fraud. Sites like Angie’s List—a ratings and reviews site for home-improvement contractors—take off because they are curated to ensure the reviews’ (and reviewers’) legitimacy. In other words, because they earn our trust. Calacanis himself has developed Mahalo.com, a search engine that uses human beings to find and organize the best links for given search terms—and to filter out irrelevant or spam results.

A new ethic is evolving: trustworthiness is good for business.

Tom Dellner is executive editor of Electronic Retailer Magazine and editor of its supplement, Online Strategies

Bookmark It

Hide Sites