Anti-Ad Complaint Redefines Personally Identifiable Information

Two activist groups who filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission earlier this week are attempting to redefine the commonly understood definition of personally identifiable information in an effort to get anti-online-advertising legislation passed.

Jeff Chester, head of the Center for Digital Democracy, claimed in an interview with Direct Newsline Thursday that online information can be personally identifiable even if the advertiser doesn’t have a Web site visitor’s name or address — a claim that runs counter to the commonly understood definition of the term.

The CDD and the U.S. Public Interest Group filed a 50-page complaint with the Federal Trade Commission earlier this week calling on the FTC to investigate online advertising practices, claiming they violate consumer privacy.

“[W]hile there might not be a physical address attached to the extensive online dossiers on individual users that marketers are actively compiling and analyzing, unique identification numbers are assigned to each visitor, which serve the same purpose: Marketers know who you are, where you’ve gone and what you’ve done online,” said the complaint.

The groups asked the FTC to investigate Microsoft, Google, Yahoo and others, but focused heavily on Microsoft. “The scope of Microsoft’s online operations is unprecedented,” said the complaint.

Chester claimed he is not against advertising or cookies used for advertising.

“I’m not against interactive advertising,” he said. “I do think the vast infrastructure that has evolved to deliver these forms of personalized interactive advertising through all the key platforms of PC mobile and TV raises a host of fundamental questions that go to the core of what it means to have a democracy in the 21st century.”

Online advertising technology has become “too powerful and too pervasive,” Chester said.

As a result, the complaint urges the FTC to ask Congress to pass legislation “requiring affirmative consent for all data used — which must be regularly updated and re-approved by users. An all-embracing opt-in should be the minimum standard.”

Chester said he takes issue with the idea that marketing information isn’t personally identifiable unless the consumer’s name and address are attached to it.

When challenged on his definition of personally identifiable information, Chester said: “Those unique identifiers attached to your computer or in fact those unique identifiers attached to your set-top box or your mobile phone, have psycho-demographic attributes that allow them to more precisely identify your characteristics, [and] your characteristics, whether or not they are Joe Blow or 10 versions of Joe Blow, represent who you are. When you take powerful content applications, and when you take marketing strategies through ad networks across Web sites without user consent and you are targeting them based on what you’ve identified are their psycho-social vulnerabilities and interests that’s personally identifiable information.”