The IP Development Network Blog

Following the recent two part series on personalised adverts, I thought it worthwhile grounding this into some sort of real life scenario. In spite of the references to Facebook, what I have written so far is pretty theoretical - networks could conspire with advertisers leaving you with little choice but to comply. Without grounding, you could be forgiven for thinking I'm off on one again.

The Birth of The Empire
As regular readers will know, I have occasionally highlighted Google's dark side. This is not because they have done anything to me personally - this is no vendetta. In fact, every time I have had cause to deal with them, they have done the job required quickly and more efficiently than any other product alternative. I almost exclusively use Google search and I am writing this on Google's Blogger service, after all!

My concern with Google surrounds how on the one hand they paint themselves as the white knight, defending the principles of the internet - freedom of speech, openness, ubiquity and so on - while on the other they continue to gather vast quantities of data about who I am and what I am interested in. There is a disconnect here for me between the PR values and the actions, primarily because the data is collected "secretly" and I have no clear way of reviewing it's accuracy or authorising its use.

Misdirection: The Access Network Wars
Perhaps I have just watched too much Star Wars, but I worry that we may wake up and realise that the battle we have been led into is part of a very different war from the one we thought we were fighting. It is a lot easier to think of Big Telco as the bad-guy because they are the ones that send you a bill every month and when things break, theirs is the more physical presence that is easier to see and therefore blame.

I just wonder whether this is actually the other way around. A desperate man can look like a mad man to most who see him... Of course I am biased towards Telco, that is where my history lies, so you should definitely apply a filter to what you read from me. Everyone has their own bias that they need to be aware of - including you.

Emergency Powers to Save the Internet
If Google wins the auction battle for 700MHz spectrum in January, they will be lauded by internet fundamentalists as the saviour of the net. They will undoubtedly deliver on their promises of a more open network for application innovation. This is not in dispute.

But saving the American dream? "This network will be a servant of America and not a master of our country's future". No, Google didn't say this, Frontline Wireless did. Frontline Wireless are nothing but a Lobbying Firm. They also added, "this election will determine is whether the wire-based internet remains open".

Please stop treating me like an idiot. Google are investing in a license for the same reason as anyone else would - to make money from it. Telcos have traditionally had different models, but Google's is that what they will receive in return for the license is a wealth of additional customer data that can improve their ad efficiency and hence what they can charge advertisers.

With Great Power Comes a Wealth of Data
Currently, Google does not know who I am. They just know me by my IP address and the profile they have of me is that I like to search for telecoms and internet news. If I was using Google Reader, they would be able to add a fair bit more - I am an Arsenal fan and I like cricket. I subscribe to BBC and Yahoo! news feeds, but I don't read them very regularly.

Consider then the additional information they would gather if they also provided my access. My IP address would be linked to my postcode, so they would have the full range of geo-demographics at their disposal.

They would know that I live in a five bed house in a village with two pubs and one curry restaurant. They would know that Tesco's and Waitrose are my supermarket choices and that I am more likely to be a Times reader than someone who reads The Sun. In fact, they would know an awful lot more than this, but I am not going to go into any further details because I don't know who is reading this. I don't want everyone to know who I am...

It was pointed out to me this week that if I have ever used Google Checkout (which I have, once), they may actually have this link already, but if they also provided my access there would be ever more about me that they could see.

A Very Slippery Slope
Because they would be providing my access, there would be nothing stopping them from collecting and analysing all my internet page requests - not just the search results and RSS feeds - but everything from my banking provider, who provides my electricity and so on and so on.

Where are the limits to what they can collect and what they can do? More to the point, who knows what they are collecting and what they are doing with it? Today there are clear lines demarcating access (with all the subscriber info coming from the address) and content.

Privacy Firewalls
Telcos already have access to the data described above, but this is not being collected, analysed and used for marketing purposes because that is not the Telco business model (today). The link between your IP address and your physical address currently held in trust by your service provider. This is a very important fact protecting your privacy.

It may well be that telcos decide to try and monetise this data too. If they did so, I would also expect them to be up front with their plans and what this means for your privacy. In fact I would expect this to be an opt-in model where you received a discount on service fees in exchange for agreeing to share your information.

Google's Business Case Needs Your Private Data
It is clear to me why Google are prepared to pay $4.6bn for the spectrum, but this is not to foster innovation on the internet. Google are not a charity and they can clearly see that personalisation of their ad model needs information that can only be determined from knowing who I am as a physical being. $4.6bn (plus another chunk for the network equipment) gives them this information.

The business case is simple: advertisers pay more to reach the people they want and only the people they want. Google's revenue grows so Google get the $4.6bn back with interest over the long term. My issue is that Google are not saying "we want the spectrum so we can find out who you are". If they were, would there still be so many avid supporters of a Google network?

Labels: 700MHz Spectrum, Google, targeted ads

# posted by Jeremy Penston @ 9/14/2007 09:35:00 AM

Friday, 14 September 2007

Personalised Advertising and Google's Spectrum Bid