I was interviewed for a story recently. (It’s still in the mill.) In the correspondence that followed, the reporter asked me to clarify a statement: “that the idea of selling your data is nuts.” I didn’t remember exactly what I said, so I responded,
I think what I meant was this:
1) The use value of personal data so far exceeds its sale value that it’s insane to compare the two.
Especially because …
2) There never has been a market for selling personal data, and to create one now, just because marketers are sneakily getting that data for free, doesn’t mean there should be one.
Especially because …
3) The sums paid by marketers for personal data are actually tiny on a per-person basis.
4) Selling one’s personal data amounts to marketing exposure of one’s self. It’s like stripping, only less sexy. And for a lot less money.
And added a pointer to For personal data, use value beats sale value.
-
I’m an advocate for moving away from the cow/calf model… and unknowingly have been so for a while!
I also believe I may have something to contribute to the effort.
I’m an ‘amateur’ anthropologist (just a B.A. and no pro experience after college)…
But the concept I developed along with the method for its practical implementation actually may be the path to that user-centered web…
Its a user’s account (which may or may not be funded periodically as a sort of virtual ‘cash card’) also facilitating abilities to co-ordinate with other account-holders for activities which may or may not require funds.
I believe such a network can be catalyzed especially by its ability to facilitate a viable political micro-transaction… (which is a fundamental of speech) and further forms a root for a personal data market.
I’d be happy to expand on why I’ve been asserting for a few years now that this ‘commons-dedicated account’ forms the root of a new landscape and the true online public square…
The Chagora Model: Scaling Speech
http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/2012/01/chagora-model-scaling-speech-and.htmlpatent has been issued…
Issues in Scaling Civilization: The Altruism Problem
http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/2012/02/issues-in-scaling-civilization-altruism.htmlLeveling the Transaction Landscape: Technology and the Campfire
http://culturalengineer.blogspot.com/2011/04/leveling-transaction-landscape.htmlI know I have much to learn in this field… but I believe I have something to contribute and would like an opportunity to explore it further with others. I’ve yet to have that opportunity and long for it. This has been and remains a difficult journey.
-
P.S. In this context “personal data market” is in the sense that the users ‘own’ the network and have personal control on access to commercial interests wishing to reach them… NOT that each user auctions off his information… (though I suppose you never know how things may evolve within such a construct)
-
In my view Doc,
Personal data is important because it helps allocate resources more effectively. Win-win-win outcomes will come from creating mutually supportive incentives that reduce collective inefficiencies.
Like you, I wouldn’t trust a marketer with it though.
When end users get a share of the value created from their personal data, they will gain more confidence in sharing it. I favour a data co-operative that incentivises and rewards individuals for their volunteering their personal information – paid out as a dividend that is proportionate to contribution.
I do think there is a place for a Fourth Party. Do you not?
-
Doc, I think we might have been interviewed for the same story, but that’s probably as much as we have in common on this topic. Let me address your points..
1 – The great thing about data is that it’s free to copy – thus it’s sale and use aren’t mutually exclusive. The sale of data can be very easy, imagine it as an low-friction currency instead of an either/or tradeoff.
2 – There’s a very popular market for personal data run by Bluekai. They even let you control what data is sold about you on it. Audience targeting as an industry is hundreds of millions of dollars, specifically Google runs a large RTB exchange where data plays a large part in the creation of value. Just because most people in the VRM space don’t understand how to operate in the audience marketplace doesn’t mean that it’s non-existant.
3 – Advertising spend in the US is about $750/adult. As addressable media becomes more and more ubiquitous (It’s moving from display to video and mobile), the value of data will grow. Comparing the value of data that is sold about you today to the value of data that you can curate yourself is apples to oranges — the most valuable data, from outlets like Facebook, Google, Amazon, Craigslist and eBay isn’t available for sale so is conveniently left out of the “Your data is worth $.32” argument.
4 – Ah, the privacy straw man. Believe it or not, most advertisers don’t want information that you consider sensitive. They don’t want to know your medical history or the contents of your emails. No, they want to know what you are about to buy and what your interests are. The surreptitious nature by which 3rd party data is captured actually deters many brand advertisers from using data to the extent they’d like to.
Once people look at the data that describes them as a manageable set of feeds instead of the boogyman it’s easy to see that sharing intent and in-market data with advertisers is more like using a loyalty card or leaving your shopping list in your cart than taking your clothes off in front of strangers.
Here’s the thing: people younger than you and I get it. They understand that there’s a transaction going on, and it’s not scary, rather just annoying how opaque it is. They want to be in control. In the next couple of years we’ll see personal data brokers who understand this nuance gain traction, and it’s going to be a good thing. Everybody wins. As a publisher, demand for your product increases when more data is available. Advertisers get more targeted campaigns and less waste. Consumers see more interesting ads, and control what data is used. The only people who lose are the ones selling data about you now… and isn’t that what this is all about? Making the internet opt-in instead of opt-out?
-
An individual needs a broker to aggregate and anonymize data, the broker also helps curate a profile that the individual feels comfortable sharing with advertisers. The company I co-founded last year, Enliken, is doing just that, and letting people donate the proceeds to a cause they believe in.
Bluekai and their ilk have notoriously sparse, and contradictory, data. However poor their data, they’ve done a fantastic job creating a liquid market for it, and an industry has sprung up around utilizing data to target individuals on addressable media. The buyers in the market don’t care if they buy from Bluekai, Brilig or wherever – now that they have the capability to process data and use it to target media in real time they are in market themselves for the best data available.
Now that there’s a marketplace with buyers your data really is worth something. Enliken lets individuals make a difference aggregating data that is already used to target with ads, and at the same time helps move the market towards a consumer controlled model.
-
Pingback from In response to Doc Searls « Enliken on June 6, 2012 at 1:28 pm
-
Thanks for the links to Enliken. So, what could an advertiser glean from this snapshot?
1 – You used Glance and Webex. While you might not be in the market for web presentation software, chances are that you use technology like it often and so might be interested in an offer from GoToMeeting.
2 – You browsed on amazon for a book by Heather Armstrong. Publishers of similar books would like to reach you with information about their books.
3 – You were pitched by a company called DataMonitor, a (more affordable) competitor of theirs might be interested in showing you a message.
You’ve only given us a few hours of data, but over time your history provides a lot more durable information. For example – engagement as someone is shopping normally ramps as they get closer to purchase, after which it trails off. Understanding where consumers are in this process is very important to advertisers.
Your point about only being a consumer part of the time is spot on. We learned a very important lesson early on at Enliken: 95% of the value to advertisers is locked up in 5% of your data.
-
What advertisers don’t get is this:
(1) I don’t use _any_ site because of the ads. I use it because of the content. I understand that ads pay for the content, but any site whose advertisers are too intrusive goes on my blocked list. I was using a webmail provider to send some docs to my home e-mail from work. One of the advertisers gleefully demonstrated that they knew where I work. Say goodbye to one user.
(2) I don’t care what this or that famous person buys or uses. I don’t care what my friends, family, neighbors, relatives, or coworkers buy or use. I care more that advertisers seem to feel that tracking down who my friends, family members and other relatives, and coworkers are will enable them to persuade me to buy their products.
(3) When I’m in the market for something, I take the initiative to find out more about the product or service. Non-intrusive ads in the fairly recent past may help me in my research, but creepy and invasive ads chase me away.
Some examples that I consider intrusive:
(1) Tracking someone’s location any closer than what city.
(2) Tracking someone’s web history.
(3) Tracking someone’s apparent interests any closer than generally knowing that this person likes sports and that person likes diet foods.
(4) Tracking someone’s employer, college campus, or contacts.
(5) Moving, flashing, audible ads and ads that expand or otherwise interfere with my enjoyment of the site I visited. Ads that use Javascript/Flash to turn my computer’s resources into an offensive platform in the drive to capture the contents of my wallet.
(6) Since you bought a book about X, here’s a list of five more books about X. “Since you’re ‘friends’ with Y, here are some others we think you’d like to connect with.” “Since you visited our site using Android, we think you’d like our app!” (I prefer it if you leave me alone to discover what I like on my own.)
(7) Collecting information about my age, marital/relationship status, number/ages of children, education level, medical condition, political leanings, religious leanings, income.You’ll note that except for #5, the list includes factors that have been or are being used to single out individuals and groups for mistreatment. Generally, an advertiser is a corporation, and therefore has quite a bit more power (politically, financially, and in any transaction) than an individual. One of the few ways to ensure that corporations don’t mistreat people based on such factors is to prevent them from collecting the information in the first place.
In short, BlueKai looks like it is Eric Schmidt / Mark Zuckerberg stalker-level creepy. I’ll be watching for its invasive tentacles.
-
Pingback from Econ: Personal Data on June 11, 2012 at 6:28 am
Comments are now closed.
14 comments