Does Advertising Really Need so Much Tracking?

Our old friend Doc Searls is taking another step toward putting readers in charge of their data and taking on the use of too much consumer tracking. In a prototype edition of the reborn Linux Journal, he is going ask readers to indicate what they want in their advertising:

We believe the only cure is code that gives publishers ways to do exactly what readers want, which is not to bare their necks to adtech’s fangs every time they visit a website.

We’re doing that by reversing the way terms of use work. Instead of readers always agreeing to publishers’ terms, publishers will agree to readers’ terms. The first of these will say something like this:

That appeared on a whiteboard one day when we were talking about terms readers proffer to publishers. Let’s call it #DoNotByte. Like others of its kind, #DoNotByte will live at Customer Commons, which will do for personal terms what Creative Commons does for personal copyright.

Publishers and advertisers can both accept that term, because it’s exactly what advertising has always been in the offline world, as well as in the too-few parts of the online world where advertising sponsors publishers without getting too personal with readers.

Notice he is not anti-advertising as a business model. He is for restoring advertising to what it used to be — brand advertising. He refers to data-driven advertising as “junk mail.”

He theorizes that we’ve (publishers) lost a lot here by putting data collection in the driver’s seat:

By now you’re probably wondering how adtech has come to displace real advertising online. As I put it in “Separating Advertising’s Wheat and Chaff”, “Madison Avenue fell asleep, direct response marketing ate its brain, and it woke up as an alien replica of itself.” That happened because Madison Avenue, like the rest of big business, developed a big appetite for “big data”, starting in the late 2000s. (I unpack this history in my EOF column in the November 2015 issue of Linux Journal.)

Madison Avenue also forgot what brands are and how they actually work. After a decade-long trial by a jury that included approximately everybody on Earth with an internet connection, the verdict is in: after a $trillion or more has been spent on adtech, no new brand has been created by adtech; nor has the reputation of an existing brand been enhanced by adtech. Instead adtech does damage to a brand every time it places that brand’s ad next to fake news or on a crappy publisher’s website.

Yes, Doc is a friend of ZEDO.  But he is also a terrific writer, and you owe it to yourself as a publisher or a member of our ecosystem to read what he has to say in Linux Journal.