Re: [projectvrm] How concerned SHOULD consumers be about their data? And WHY?

[Don Marti < >]

On the subject of users being concerned about
tracking, or not, an interesting piece of verbiage
from Snapchat's latest announcement....

  We want to see if we can deliver an experience
  that’s fun and informative, the way ads used to
  be, before they got creepy and targeted. It’s
  nice when all of the brilliant creative minds out
  there get our attention with terrific content.

  http://blog.snapchat.com/post/100255857340/advertising-on-snapchat

Of course, the "Snapchat generation" seems most likely
to "voluntarily share personal data with a company in
exchange for a 5% discount"...

  http://marketingland.com/survey-87-percent-use-track-elude-marketers-76097

so maybe this is Snapchat's way to try to get _its_
flavor of mobile advertising out of the weeds of
coupons and "click the monkey" and into more valuable,
less tracked, territory.

IMHO it won't work for one site or one app to do it
alone, though. As long as the _medium_ is seen as
trackable it won't pack as much signaling power as
media where tracking is more difficult.

  http://zgp.org/~dmarti/business/snapchat/

Don


begin Doc Searls quotation of Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 12:17:17AM +0200:
> 
> On Oct 17, 2014, at 9:01 AM, Graham Reginald Hill 
> <
 >
>  wrote:
> 
> > Hi Nathan
> >  
> > You make an interesting statement at the end of your post when you say, 
> > "users aren’t as generally concerned as we’d expect them to be about the 
> > extent of stalking". Putting aside the stalking exaggeration, WHO is we
> 
> Developers wanting to solve problems in the marketplace.
> 
> > and why SHOULD we expect consumers to be more concerned about how their 
> > data is collected and used?
> 
> Because the demand for relief from abuse is clear and obvious. It is also 
> well-researched. Have you looked at TRUSTe's reports? Here's their 2014 
> report for the U.S. And here's the 2014 report for the U.K. In case you 
> don't want to click on those links, here's a screen grab of the top of the 
> first (the second isn't much different):
> 
> 
> Here's the press release:
> 
> > TRUSTe Research Reveals More Consumers Concerned about Business Data 
> > Collection than Government Surveillance
> > 
> > U.S. Consumer Confidence Index Shows Online Trust Hits Three-Year Low 
> > with Only 55 Percent of Internet Users Willing to Trust Most Businesses 
> > with Their Personal Data
> > 
> > San Francisco - January 28, 2014 - To kick off Data Privacy Day 
> > 2014(#DPD14), TRUSTe®, the leading global Data Privacy Management (DPM) 
> > company, today released its latest U.S. Consumer Confidence Index, which 
> > shows that a high proportion of U.S. adults aged 18 and older are worried 
> > about their privacy online, online trust is declining and the potential 
> > impact on business remains high. 74 percent of U.S. internet users are 
> > more concerned about privacy than a year ago and more users cite business 
> > data collection, than government surveillance programs, as the reason for 
> > the increase in their concerns.
> > 
> > "Even with all the media coverage of government surveillance programs 
> > such as the NSA’s PRISM, more consumers remain concerned about businesses 
> > collecting their information with only 55 percent regularly willing to 
> > share their personal data online. These findings send a clear signal that 
> > business data collection, not government activity, is the main driver for 
> > increased privacy concerns," said Chris Babel, CEO of TRUSTe. "While some 
> > businesses are taking steps today to address privacy concerns, many are 
> > not, and the bar is rising."
> > 
> > Babel added, "This research shows that people are more confident managing 
> > their privacy, but the actions they are taking are bad for businesses 
> > making them less likely to click on ads, use apps, or enable location 
> > tracking on smart phones. Companies need to act now to protect consumers 
> > and their personal information, which is vital to the success of their 
> > business, and address these high privacy concerns to build online trust, 
> > minimize risk and stay ahead of the competition."
> > 
> > The survey reveals that:
> > 
> > Consumer online privacy concerns remain high with 92 percent of US 
> > internet users worrying about their privacy online (up from 89 percent in 
> > January 2013 and 90 percent in January 2012)
> > More than half of U.S. internet users 55 percent said they trust most 
> > businesses with their personal information online (down from 57 percent 
> > in January 2013 and 59 percent in January 2012); and
> > 89 percent of consumers (no change from January 2013 and up from 88 
> > percent in January 2012) said that they avoided doing business with 
> > companies they do not believe protect their privacy online.
> > 
> > Findings from the TRUSTe 2014 U.S. Consumer Confidence Privacy Report
> > Conducted online by Harris Interactive on behalf of TRUSTe, the survey 
> > that was fielded online among 2,019 U.S. adults between December 11-13, 
> > 2013, shows that overall privacy concerns of U.S. online adults remain 
> > high, with 92 percent worrying at least sometimes about their general 
> > online privacy compared with 89 percent in findings from a similar study 
> > conducted via Harris Interactive in January 2013.
> > 
> > When U.S. internet users who are more concerned about privacy online now 
> > than they were a year ago were asked in more detail about the top causes 
> > of privacy concerns, businesses sharing personal information and 
> > companies tracking online behavior topped the list of concerns. Specific 
> > findings include:
> > 
> > 58 percent were concerned about businesses sharing their personal 
> > information with other companies;
> > 47 percent were concerned about companies tracking their online behavior 
> > to target them with ads and content; and only
> > 38 percent listed media coverage of U.S. government surveillance programs 
> > as a reason for increased concern.
> > 
> > Consumer trust has declined and 70 percent of U.S. internet users feel 
> > more confident about managing their privacy than one year ago and common 
> > actions they are taking include:
> > 
> > 83 percent are less likely to click on advertisements
> > 80 percent of smartphone users avoid using smartphone apps they don’t 
> > believe protect their privacy
> > 74 percent of smartphone users are less likely to enable location 
> > tracking on their smartphone
> > 
> > In addition to these actions, 76 percent of consumers are more likely to 
> > look for privacy certifications and seals to address their privacy 
> > concerns.
> > 
> 
> All we are trying to do with VRM is solve some of these problems from the 
> consumer side, instead of just from the marketing and sales side — which by 
> themselves are clearly doing an inadequate job.
> 
> > In my experience, it is only through seeing things through consumers 
> > eyes, feelings, thoughts and actions that we have a hope of influencing 
> > them;
> 
> Is TRUSTe not doing that? And why do you think we're here, if NOT for that?
> 
> > something that the ProjectVRM as a whole has singularly failed to do.
> 
> Why the snarky digs, Graham? Do you realize you're putting down the hard 
> work of hundreds of people who are here to talk about their work, the 
> issues they face, and to help each other? That kind of dig is just a 
> put-down, and it doesn't help.
> 
> > A degree of privacy is important to me from an existential perspective. 
> > However, I am willing to trade off a degree of privacy for something of 
> > value to me, providing I have a modicum of control over how it is 
> > created. Most of these axiological decisions are relatively unimportant 
> > and are largely made without much conscious thought being required on my 
> > part. And I am heavily influenced by a wide range of cognitive biases. I 
> > suspect that most other consumers behave similarly. The work of 
> > Gazzaniga, Damasio, Kahneman and others suggest that this is probably 
> > true. Of course, individual consumers trade-off privacy, value and 
> > control is up to them, individually. 
> >  
> > Thoughts?
> 
> Living in society has always involved privacy trade-offs. These are 
> well-understood and developed in the physical world. They are clearly not 
> yet in the online world. That consumers tolerate abuse does not legitimize 
> it. Nor does it disqualify efforts to relieve that abuse and create better 
> systems.
> > 
> > Best regards from Bishopsgate, London, Graham
> 
> And from Prague,
> 
> Doc
> 
> > -- 
> > Dr. Graham Hill
> > 
 
> > UK +44 7564 122 633
> > DE +49 170 487 6192
> > http://twitter.com/GrahamHill
> > http://www.linkedin.com/in/grahamhill
> > http://www.customerthink.com/graham_hill
> > 
> > Partner
> > Optima Partners
> > http://www.optimapartners.co.uk
> > 
> > Senior Associate
> > Nyras Capital
> > http://www.nyras.co.uk
> > 
> > Associate
> > Ctrl-Shift
> > https://www.ctrl-shift.co.uk
> >  
> >  
> > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 16. Oktober 2014 um 19:46 Uhr
> > Von: "Nathan Schor" 
> > <
 >
> > An: "ProjectVRM list" 
> > <
 >
> > Betreff: [projectvrm] All your social media posts now sorted by location 
> > and up for sale
> > http://venturebeat.com/2014/10/15/all-your-social-media-posts-are-now-in-the-public-domain-forever
> > 
> > http://venturebeat.com/2014/10/15/geofeedia-geolocates-your-social-media-postings-reaps-3-5m/
> > 
> > ‘Without question, Geofeedia has the potential as a game changer. That’s 
> > because its software filters, analyzes, and then geolocates your social 
> > media postings, all in real time, in any town, city, or country. In other 
> > words, anything you post on Twitter or Instagram, for example, is tagged, 
> > with your name on it, for the world to see.’
> > 
> > “We’re not hiding anything or doing things we shouldn’t be doing. We are 
> > an aggregator of public information, and we are making it easier to 
> > aggregate that information. So there’s no privacy concern from our end,” 
> > their CEO said.
> > 
> > No one on this list will be surprised by those quotes from the above 
> > posts, describing a product that sorts all your social media posts by 
> > location and puts then up for sale to any and all bidders, tagged, with 
> > your name on it, for the world to see.’
> > 
> > But that last italicized phrase – up for sale to any and all bidders, 
> > tagged, with your name on it, for the world to see –  may be quite 
> > helpful to our cause because it makes crystal clear an aspect that is 
> > usually ignored about the surveillance every customers is constantly 
> > under: It’s just not the actual stalking that is potentially damaging to 
> > csutomers, but much more problematic is the results are available to 
> > anyone.
> > 
> > Perhaps then as part of our marketing strategy to a wider audience, we 
> > should make a bigger point of how easily (and forever) accessible 
> > location information now is to anyone paying a minimal fee.
> > 
> > IMHO, since users aren’t as generally concerned as we’d expect them to be 
> > about the extent of stalking, then perhaps the promiscuous availability 
> > of the results to anyone is a credible candidate to join the legitimate 
> > issues (along with their kids, cars, and cats) customers wake up every 
> > morning worrying about,. So emphasizing the available to anyone message 
> > is more likely to incentivize change.
> > 
> > Nathan Schor 305.632.1368 
> > 
 
> >  
> 

-- 
Don Marti                    
http://zgp.org/~dmarti/