Phorm finally looks to UK launch
Phorm, the online advertising firm, is finally making noises about going live with their controversial advertising platform. Phorm allows advertisers to target users based on their online behaviour.
We’ve discussed behavioural targeting – and whether this is a breach of user privacy – before, and we (I say we but mean me don’t I!) hold the view that it’s worth giving up a little bit of privacy in order to get a tailored online experience. I believe that people distrust behavioural targeting due to two misunderstandings. First, that they think that it is the online equivalent of getting direct mail through the post. And second, they believe that online privacy breaches means the lost of personal data such as bank account details.
Phorm are trying to dispel public fears in a public meeting next week. Anti phorm campaigners claim that the service breaches UK data interception laws. And according to the BBC, the European Commission have even started legal action against Britain over the platform. Despite this, the company actually received official clearance from the Home Office, and the police – who investigated BT’s trial of the technology – have now closed the case.
Phorm CEO Kent Ertugrul told BBC News: “We have been supported or endorsed by all of the leading stakeholders… Ofcom, the Information Commissioner’s Office, the Home Office, leading privacy advocates like Simon Davies, the advertising industry and publishers have all backed our service,” he said.
The official line on Phorm technology is that it ‘trawls’ websites visited by users whose ISPs are using the service, and matches keywords on those websites to the users’ profiles. The user is then targeted with ads that are tailored to their profile.
The initial trials were with BT, but Talk Talk and Virgin have also confirmed their interest. Following all the negative publicity, ISPs have to weigh up any revenue per user the system might generate with the loss of those customers whose fears cause them to migrate away.
The government for its part has given the system a green light but only if users have given consent and have the ability to opt out.
Privacy groups The Open Rights Group and the Foundation for Information Policy Research are still firmly opposed to use of the technology.
Our view – that it is a lack of understanding of behavioural targeting, and the belief that somehow users will suffer a breach of their personal data is what is creating the resistance to the service – is shared by the CEO Kent Ertugrul. He said: “I am surprised by the fact, after it has been repeatedly explained how the technology works, they seem to be very keen on misunderstanding what it does.”
What do you think? Would you allow yourself to be behaviourally targeted if it meant you saw relevant ads? Or are you an website builder and advertiser who would like to make use of the technology? Leave us a comment below.
16.04.09 Update: According to Web User, privacy campaigners have cheered the news that Amazon are planning to deploy technology that prevents Phorm from gathering information about users whilst they are visiting the Amazon website. Jim Killock of the Open Rights Group (ORG) said: “By choosing to block the contentious online advertising system from scanning its web pages, [Amazon has] taken the positive choice to protect their users’ privacy and their own brands”.
Phorm for its part responded with a statement which read: “there is a process in place to allow publishers to contact Phorm and opt out of the system, but we do not comment on individual cases”.
Round 1 (or is it Round 99?) to the privacy lobby?
22.04.09 Update: According to ComputerShopper magazine, Wikipedia has now decided to opt out of Phorm. An email sent from Wikimedia (the organisation that runs Wikipedia) to Phorm stated “we consider the scanning and profiling of our visitors’ behaviour by a third party to be an infringement on their privacy.”
Round 2 all done then!
28.04.09 Update: Phorm has launched a website to take on critics. Kent Ertugrul says this is because it has been relentlessly under fire from “a small, but dedicated band of ‘privacy pirates’ who appear determined to harm our company”. Phorm are complaining that privacy activists are targeting MPs, journalists and regulators to try and “distort the truth and misrepresent Phorm’s technology”.
2-1?