I must admit that this post will be hard for me to keep to 10 (or 300) words or less.
Today, ClickZ had an article entitled "Consumers Want Personalization -- and Privacy". It sure sounds like those "fickle consumers" want their "cake and eat it". In it Doug Feick of ChoiceStream said "Consumers are clearly expressing an interest in a personalized experience. Those same consumers are expressing significant fear about the security of their personal information should they exchange it for a more personalized online experience." He explained it away by saying "In the last year, there has been so much coverage about the potential compromise to personal data; we believe the results largely reflect that the survey took place amid coverage of these security breaches."
Now, maybe I'm misinterpreting what he just said to mean that the problem is the "coverage", rather than the real events that threatened the identity theft or other forms of misuse of personally identifiable information of many people. I consider knowing the likes, dislikes, preferences, and other idiosyncrasies of people to be "personally identifiable" in nature. But, when consumers can't even trust the search engines to fully disclose upfront which are the paid advertising listings in "paid inclusion", or what "Sponsored Links" mean in relation to their positioning on the search engine results page (SERP), and what determines how they got that positioning, then consumers have a right not to trust search engines in asking for "personalized" information.
I'm reminded of a parody on a quote: "What we have here is a failure to gain TRUST". Trust comes from Open, Honest, Upfront, and Good (O'HUG) Communication combined with the "test of time". I'm also reminded of a few quotes on the home page of a great blog called Commonsense & Wonder. On the upper right hand side of the home page is a quote from Ralph Waldo Emerson: "Nothing astonishes men so much as common sense and plain dealing." Maybe if there weren't so many hidden agendas in the marketing world, and more O'HUG Communication in "plain dealing" there would be more trust.
Then, Commonsense & Wonder quotes Robert Heinlein: ""Never attribute to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity." As a "non-malicious" online marketing, sales, and advertising person for many years, I believe that whether it is third or first party cookies that are at issue here, there is a big need for more clear and conspicuous upfront disclosure, as far as what is happening "behind the scenes" on the internet. Some may say that that approach would cause more problems than what it would be worth. But, I say that it is pure STUPIDITY to not do it. It is better to deal with the education challenge versus the trust challenge.
Another quote there is from Dale Carnegie: "Any fool can criticize, condemn, and complain -- and most fools do." I believe we all need constructive criticism, positive conviction vs. condemnation, and diplomatic complaints that have a suggested solution to the challenge. Certainly the search engines need these things when it comes to certain aspects of upfront disclosure and trademark usage in search advertising.
Now, I am not affiliated with Consumer Reports WebWatch in any way, but they are having an upcoming Conference on "Trust or Consequence: The Web's Reputation at Risk" in October of this year. I'm hoping that some good suggestions will come out of this that are taken seriously by anyone associated with the internet.
Lastly, Ralph Waldo Emerson has another quote that is buried within his link on the home page of Commonsense & Wonder. It says: "What lies behind us and what lies before us are small matters compared to what lies within us." Trust, integrity, and empathetic O'HUG Communication lie within us. So keep in mind that if "Personalization" is accepted and trusted widely, it will benefit us all. Enough said.
Comments