ok, finally read the full announcement from UK yesterday. It's a BFD. Another major nation integrating thinking on competition and data policy. This adds to the German Cartel Office decision vs Facebook, state AGs and federal antitrust suits, US Congress and other parliaments. /1
"self-reinforcing" and "insurmountable without regulatory intervention"... /2
"We do not agree" that competition law and data protection are in opposition. /3
The regulators speak directly to how weak competition can undermine privacy protections...and leave users with no meaningful choice. Witness Google and Facebook tracking us more than any companies and 85-90% of the incremental growth in the market. /4
a good reminder that they're still looking at the core of how much of the digital advertising market works ("RTB"). I expect more to come on this but there are claims it's inconsistent with data protection and GDPR. /5
this is the kicker point - about siloing data in the case of dominant platforms - and it's consistent with Germany's decision against Facebook, the draft EU Digital Markets Act and where US needs to go. /6
👀 /7
recall when Republican congressman @RepArmstrongND asked Google and Facebook CEOs about this topic late last year. Their answers weren't crisp and begging for action. (ignore Jack) ;) /8
Ugh, just noticed @CMAgovUK cited Google research again. Note, this study only looked narrowly at effects on open exchanges on Google tech for 500? “popular” sites. Google generated study for press headline and tried to bury but CMA pursued. It’s what I hinted at here. @ICOnews
I find it funny that the direct response and tracking complex can’t understand why a brand like Apple runs privacy image ads. Can’t fathom a brand creating desire and demand around attributes of a fundamental human right they’ve embraced while Facebook and Google have abused.
Watch trust in the Apple brand go up further at a fine of great vulnerability. This isn’t about winning or losing on being able to roll out a feature or even driving phone sales. It’s brand reinforcing for products that sell at prices considerably above their competition.
And in winning there, it also gives Apple a clear differentiator as more and more devices are connected to our lives. Heck it could be more about selling Apple cars in the coming years than anything the tracking complex keeps focusing on.
Outstanding news from yesterday. Google failed to move the critically important advertising antitrust case out of Texas. This is the one where they botched a filing and we learned more about allegations of collusion with Facebook. Grateful East coast witnesses can go to Texas.
It also speeds it up so the trial can start next year rather than 2023. There are real-time market harms happening including Google’s attempt to design the market mechanics for the future. This coincides with major UK announcement Tuesday (note Texas case and UK are aligned).
Here is something from last night on UK announcement for those interested. I’ll also paste my notes on the Texas lawsuit. Counter to Axios bit this morning, FB/G reckoning is moving along. ps @scottros you left off FB sued by nearly all states plus massive EU loss this week.
incoming. “Tracking prevention” is here in a big way. eg: Apple’s iOS 14.5 is kneecapping Facebook’s core profit model of mining our data while we use apps that Facebook doesn’t even own - aka “tracking.” 94% of users are saying NFW to prompts. /1
Conventional wisdom is tracking prevention helps Google and Facebook as they have a ton of data from owned apps (Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, Search, Gmail, Maps) but that’s wrong. Regulators have shown most of their data comes from acting as third parties - aka “Tracking.” /2
Facebook, Google, and the most powerful lobbies in the tech media industry have spent more than a decade propping up narratives to defend their most important members' "surveillance economics." But they’ve lost enormous credibility everywhere in the past few years. /3
prob not a secret but my fav topic. It's why we launched DCN and all its principles around trust in 2014 - brands are proxies for trust. "You know what you're going to get!" NBC's brands ooze trust for news and entertainment with both viewers and advertisers. /1 #WhyTrustMatters
Trust by definition means a dependable, reliable value exchange built off relationships, experiences together, and even other trusted relationships brought to the table… and yes it does involve transparency when there is a gap. #WhyTrustMatters /2
for consumers, it makes life simpler because they know what they're going to get from that brand whether a consumer product, auto brand, a service or from a news or entertainment company, channel, series, etc. #WhyTrustMatters
If you work in advertising, adtech, media, or loathe Facebook, Inc, today’s NYT Daily is amazingly strong. Isaac does a remarkable job at peeling back the real motivations and importantly business impact of data protection to Facebook’s core biz model. /1 podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the…
My opinion is Mike Isaac prob was able to cut through the noise (FB needs to spin and fight this without showing its soft underbelly) because of years of covering the company plus digging deeper on back story which he did in this outstanding report. /2
In backstory, I just connected dots Apple-FB’s Davos showdown was Jan 2019 immediately ahead of Germany decision vs Facebook. Little doubt that Cook telling Zuckerberg he should purge all data collected outside of FB apps also played a role in FB rushed announcement. /3
Here is your problem, “BSI”: None of this harmful content appears on any of our trusted, “managed” news sites except when doing the costly reporting on it. They ALL show up on your funding sources of unmanaged user-generated content at Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, et al. (1 / 4)
Same challenge exists with the unbridled adtech supply chain you built allowing for surveillance and audience targeting detached from the high-reputation content around the ads shifting value to wherever the data can be aggregated at scale and used on the cheapest content (2 / 4)
So I recognize the work you’re doing but until tools influence spending at the domain/brand reputation level, this is all a charade distracting from the problems of accountability and trust. Excluding high-reputation pubs based on keywords is dumb. cc Google. (3 /4)