Re: ISSUE 25: ACTION 415: Audience measurement research

By calling for a separate industry-based opt-out system, this proposal completely undermines the concept of Do Not Track.  I cannot support it.

If, indeed, the industry is willing to provide an opt out, then DNT should suffice and there is no reason whatsoever for this as a permitted use.


On Jul 2, 2013, at 10:27 AM, Rigo Wenning <rigo@w3.org> wrote:

> Dear all, 
> 
> based on the text attached at the end of this email, that I received 
> today from Kathy, and that was discussed during a call today, I withdraw 
> my requirement for a minimum bucket size of 812 people. I support the 
> new text suggested as attached: 
> 
> ====
> Information may be collected, retained and used by a third party for 
> audience measurement research where the information is used to 
> calibrate, validate or calculate through data collected from opted-in 
> panels, which in part contains information collected across sites and 
> over time from user agents.
> 
> 
> A third party eligible for an audience measurement research permitted 
> use MUST adhere to the following restrictions. The data collected by the 
> third party:
> 
> •     Must be pseudonymised before statistical analysis begins, and
> •     Must not be shared with any other party unless the data are de-
> identified prior to sharing, and
> •     Must be deleted or de-identified as early as possible after the 
> purpose of collection is met and in no case shall such retention, prior 
> to de-identification, exceed 53 weeks and
> •     Must not be used for any other independent purpose including 
> changing an individual’s user experience or building a profile for ad 
> targeting purposes. 
> •     In addition, the third party must be subject to an independent 
> certification process under the oversight of a generally-accepted market 
> research industry organization that maintains a web platform providing 
> user information about audience measurement research. This web platform 
> lists the parties eligible to collect information under DNT standards 
> and the audience measurement research permitted use and it provides 
> users with an opportunity to exclude their data contribution.
> 
> Non-normative: collection and use for audience measurement research
> 
> Audience measurement research creates statistical measures of the reach 
> in relation to the total online population, and frequency of exposure of 
> the content to the online audience, including paid components of web 
> pages. 
> 
> Audience measurement research for DNT purposes originates with opt-in 
> panel output that is calibrated by counting actual hits on tagged 
> content on websites. The panel output is re-adjusted using data 
> collected from a broader online audience in order to ensure data 
> produced from the panel accurately represents the whole online audience.
> 
> This online data is collected on a first party and third party basis. 
> This collection tracks the content accessed by a device rather than 
> involving the collection of a user’s browser history. Audience 
> measurement is centered around specific content, not around a user.
> 
> The collected data is retained for a given period for purposes of sample 
> quality control, and auditing.  During this retention period contractual 
> measures must be in place to limit access to, and protect the data, as 
> well as restrict the data from other uses. This retention period is set 
> by auditing bodies, after which the data must be de-identified.  
> 
> The purposes of audience measurement research must be limited to:
> 
> ·    Facilitating online media valuation, planning and buying via 
> accurate and reliable audience measurement.
> ·    Optimizing content and placement on an individual site.
> 
> The term “audience measurement research” does not include sales, 
> promotional, or marketing activities directed at a specific computer or 
> device.  Audience measurement data must be reported as aggregated 
> information such that no recipient is able to build commercial profiles 
> about particular individuals or devices. 
> 
> ===
> 
> As there is no other concrete text proposal, I would hope that we can 
> reach consensus on this proposal to be included as a permitted use in 
> the Compliance Specification and close ISSUE-25.
> 
> --Rigo
> 
> On Tuesday 02 July 2013 18:05:28 Kathy Joe wrote:
>> Following up on this action, as part of a series of calls, the two
>> most recent amendments to the normative text were discussed today in
>> a call with Rigo Wenning, Susan Israel, Richard Weaver and Adam
>> Phillips where it was clarified:
>> 
>> ŒCalibrate, validate or calculate through¹ Susan noted this was added
>> to more clearly express that the panel data is used to better
>> understand the census data, in addition to the census data being used
>> to calibrate the panel data so that each informs the other. This does
>> not radically change the process - it just describes it more clearly.
>> 
>> ŒMust not be used for any other independent purposes including
>> changing an individual¹s user experience or building a profile for ad
>> targeting purposes¹. This had already been added to cover concerns
>> like those that have been expressed on the list by Rigo and Jeff
>> Chester, which Rigo further explained to us on the call -- that an
>> audience measurement research permitted use would allow data to be
>> collected and used for another purpose, ie to change a piece of
>> advertising inflight or for addressability to particular, small
>> target groups based on user profiles, with the potential for abuse,
>> such as through redlining or offering different prices to users with
>> different profiles. This is not the purpose of, and is excluded from
>> the AMR permitted use, which is to provide a general measurement of
>> an audience (ie the number of viewers and general characteristics of
>> the audience that saw a piece of content).  The only use of AMR to
>> determine any pricing would be that a web site owner could charge an
>> advertiser or media buyer a higher rate based on traffic to a
>> website.
>> 
>> Comments are welcome and we will arrange additional calls with Justin
>> Brookman and Jeff Chester.
> 
>

Received on Tuesday, 2 July 2013 19:34:01 UTC