Advertisement Tailoring and Its Inevitable Infringements of Privacy
Inclusion into a democratic society has always instilled a great sense of pride, as well as secured many forms of advantages for Canadian citizens. Apart from the occasional rise of complaints, often as a consequence of tax increments, Canadians are, on the whole, content with their government and the wide range of social benefits it strives to provide its citizens with. Unlike their communist counterparts in China, where “opinionated” sites like Facebook, Twitter and YouTube are fully censored, Canadians are able to freely enjoy a diverse and comprehensive selection of news and information sites. This Internet freedom, as exemplified by Eli Praiser, however, causes many unanticipated controversies and concerns. Praiser focuses on the ways in which online tailoring companies restrict the scope of our Internet searches, presenting results that are “just keyed to relevance.” One important subject that he fails to incorporate into his presentation, however, is the privacy rights that tailoring companies violate in their commercial usage of one’s online behavioural data. Although more light had been shed on this issue as of late, tackling and overcoming online privacy infringements, as the following blog seeks to demonstrate, require a multidimensional approach.
Recent publications inside the Globe and Mail show that the Canadian Privacy Commission and Internet watchdog groups have decided to take a stand against online advertising companies after a complaint had been made by a Canadian online consumer. After purchasing a medical device that is used to treat sleep apnea, the consumer had started to see an upsurge of similar ads. After receiving the report, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada started to pursue the matter, and eventually found that tailoring companies had violated Canada’s Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA). The Act, as the article reports, “specifies that targeted advertising must avoid using sensitive personal data – such as information about a person’s health. While it is clear that violations had been committed, investigators find that holding someone liable is not as simple. Onlookers and the Commission were quick to point their fingers at Google, but the defendant’s response negates accountability, as well as further complicates the matter. After Google obtains one’s search results, to exemplify, it provides them to tailoring companies, which would analyze and use them to target consumers. The involvement of multiple parties, therefore, makes it difficult for authorities to hold one company liable for the infringements of privacy. To make matters worse, online consumers also find that it is virtually impossible to avoid being examined under the scope tailoring companies. Clearing their browser histories and cookies is the approach that is taken by “cautious” Internet users. To their dismay, there are frightening things, called “Super cookies” and “Zombie cookies,” that continues to pick up their tracks.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/technology/tech-news/google-broke-canadas-privacy-laws-with-targeted-ads-regulator-says/article16343346/