COTA: Leaving tracks—and erasing them—on the info superhighway

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
Jim Cota

Last month, I wrote about the way marketers collect data about consumers and use it to target them. Or, in marketing words, “use it to provide more accurate and effective results based on their interests.”

Regardless of how it’s defined, the result is the same: The more they know about you, the more uniquely targeted the advertising becomes. One of the best sources of the data? Your own Web browser.

As you go online from site to site, you leave a trail. Some of these breadcrumbs are inconspicuous and intended to improve your experience. For example, if you visit Amazon.com and put a few items in your cart, those items will be there waiting for you when you come back. Convenient? Yes. Expected? Yes. But it goes beyond that. Leave the site and head somewhere to catch up on the news and, voila, there’s an ad for the very product you put in the Amazon cart.

This technique, called remarketing, is certainly effective. And you could argue that it’s helpful for both you and the advertiser. But now that there are thousands of separate tracking companies—yes, thousands—it’s no longer just companies that have earned your trust that are doing the tracking.

In most cases, the information they’re tracking is “anonymous.” I’ve added quotes here to indicate the tenuous nature of the anonymity. Back in 2010, a data breach at Facebook allowed advertisers to identify, by name, people who clicked on their ads.

It was that data breach that led former Google engineer Brian Kennish to write a few lines of code to block that traffic from being sent to Facebook. He called it “Facebook Disconnect” and figured his work was done. But he was just getting started. More than 50,000 people downloaded the extension in two weeks.

“I realized people were starting to care about privacy,” Kennish said.

Since then, anti-tracking and anti-cookie extensions have been growing in popularity. These little tools are most often extensions that work with your Web browser. I’ve been using one called Ghostery (www.ghostery.com) for the past year or so and I’ve recently switched to Kennish’s latest version, Disconnect (www.disconnect.me). Both are exceptional at helping you leave fewer tracks wherever you go, but Disconnect does it with slightly more panache.

For one thing, it’s optimized for speed. Each of those tracking modules is sending data to an outside source, and each connection slows down your Internet connection and your page rendering time—sometimes significantly. Disconnect claims to help pages load 27 percent faster while blocking 2,000 tracking sites. It also offers an easy way to encrypt all the data that transfers through your browser, adding an extra layer of security.

Both Ghostery and Disconnect work right “out of the box,” but have a wide range of customization to allow you to decide what to share with whom. The goal, according to Kennish, is to allow users “to control who does what with their data online.”

Consumer-rights advocates have long rallied for an industry standard to give them control over the type and amount of data shared. But digital advertisers have fought against standards. As a company that helps people sell things, I certainly understand their concern. But I also understand the desire for full disclosure and control when it comes to privacy.

So until these two groups reach some accord, filters like Disconnect and Ghostery put the control of your data back where it belongs—with you.•


Cota is president and co-founder of Rare Bird Inc., a marketing communications firm specializing in Internet application development. His column appears monthly. He can be reached at jim@rarebirdinc.com.


Post a comment to this story

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.