50% of iPad Magazine Subscribers Allow Apple to Pass Info to Publishers

VanMac said:

I think it's good being given the option. Certain products I like or trust, and don't mind providing my info for more communications.

Click to expand...

thats all new actually, the problem is that even with locations off, even saying no, the Apps still do it

Congress made it clear that this is the issue, because its done with out our consent regardless

I said it in prior posts, i used little snitch and the Desktop version of iTunes, iPhoto also use this locations and dial home, even when i disabled this and blocked all ports via little snitch i still get a alert that it wants to dial out.

Allot of the info Apple has about all this has been recently modified as well, like when the locations issue was brought u to congress all the sudden Apple techs cyber patrolled the internet for negative posts by users to claim that Apple had this in their iTunes agreement, not true at all, people who have already installed iTunes never seen this in Apples agreement, and it was only recently added in tiny print.

firestarter said:

My point is that there are retail channels already in place where they don't get to learn the contact details of their readers... so having the potential of larger sales over the 'net (at the expense of a smaller proportion of contact details) is still good business.

Click to expand...

But isn't the whole reason the publishers want the customer data is so they can remind them to renew their subscription?

They may get a lot of subscribers this first year on the iPad... but next year? Who knows...

The relationship between publishers and customers is important. For decades the publishers knew exactly who their subscribers were... and who were their most loyal customers.

Now, the publishers upload a file to Apple's servers... and that's the end.

good but misleading

The notion that 50% of app users would opt in for all apps is what is implied. I think the number changes based on the user's perceived trust in the owning company's app, in this case Conde Nast. This assumes you already trust Apple enough in giving you the option to Opt in. We all know there are plenty of Apps out there that well over 90% would never opt into.

Full of Win said:

Why would anyone give them this info - you are just lining the pubs pockets when they sell your info to others.

Click to expand...

If you like a magazine enough to pay for it, don't you want the magazine to succeed financially?

"In accordance with their privacy policy"?

Most of the time you only have to check a box that says you have read the policy to continue. You may not have to read it at all.

At least Apple is not like Facebook where you are opted in until and unless you tell them you want to opt out.

I haven't purchased anything like this but USUALLY I opt in. why? Because I see what things they send me and EASILY opt-out if need be. Sometimes I opt-out right away. Sometimes I get tips/recipes/offers emailed that I can easily delete if I want to. The few times I have had problems is with using Facebook. There I am a lot more cautious because of this rampant happenings with people on FB.

Plus, if you read a magazine, you can easily skip the ads, it is NOT like they wont let you turn the page until you check you've read the ad. Also, the ads and stories will most likely adjust to the demographics of the reader. Say there are a lot of readers in TX (66%) they might start adding more info about Texas events in the magazine. Magazines use data to better sell ads to make money (they don't make money off the subscription you pay, that may not even cover printing/delivery of the magazine) and thus have better writers and stories, but they also use the data to adjust the magazine, ever so slightly, if need be to stay current.

Porchland said:

If you like a magazine enough to pay for it, don't you want the magazine to succeed financially?

Click to expand...

One has nothing to do with the other. You can like/love a magazine, and still not want your private information to distributed.

Some folks like their privacy, as do I.

"The author credits the trust in the App Store as the reason for the high opt-in rate."

Sure. I credit the lack of the words "spam", "advertisements" or "solicitations" in the vaguely worded message. Do you think they'd have 50% buy-in if the message were clear about its intentions?

Yeah, but 100% of hard copy subscribers "Opt-In".

I'd love to NOT give them any of my information.

I wouldn't mind sending them certain anonymous demographic data. That data can be used to improve the product and tailor it to my needs. However, I not willing to provide any direct contact information.

asterizk said:

Heh. Completely. I wonder if it would have made a difference if they had made the other button default.

Click to expand...

I wonder how important the "default" button is when you have to tap one of them. When these dialogs come up you rarely have access to the keyboard.

I'd probably tap yes because any magazines I subscribe to on the iPad probably already have my info from the paper subscription. Having said that, there are very few subscriptions that interest me right now. I am actually more excited by the ZINIO offerings.

Popeye206 said:

You know, thinking about your statement, Apple really deserves kudos. They have 100's of million names and info and yet, do nothing with it to my knowledge. Obviously they do have some opt in things, but buying a Mac or having an iTunes account dosent translate into junk mail.

It will be interesting to see how Google does overtime since all their free OS's are supported by ad sales.

Click to expand...

This to me is one of the key differences between iOS and Android: Google exists to market our information to advertisers. It's their lifeblood. So with them the advertisers get your information by default. It's opt-out.

With iOS, Apple insists that you be presented with that choice up front. Your information does NOT automatically go to the advertisers. It's opt-in.

Apple is standing up for the user's rights in this case, and I applaud their approach.

And yes, I say 'No' when asked, but thank you for at least asking.

toddybody said:

One has nothing to do with the other. You can like/love a magazine, and still not want your private information to distributed.
Some folks like their privacy, as do I.

Click to expand...

What is privacy? If you do anything on the internet your privacy is toast. You'd be amazed how un-private you private things are. Just run a google search for your name or email address.

Porchland said:

If you like a magazine enough to pay for it, don't you want the magazine to succeed financially?

Click to expand...

I have no wish for them to go out of business. However; if you give something of value, don't you want to be compensated?

kayloh20 said:

Not at all. I am a developer and I can in no way shape or form, think of how to get your information unless I secretly accessed your Contacts in a dummy application and sent it over. First, I would not know which one is actually you and secondly, this would not work except by luck, because the great thing about a regulated App Store is that Apple actually reviews the application and accounts for the data sent over the network (especially after the Aurora Feint stuff).

Click to expand...

I think the post you responded to is referring to gathering information for mass emailing, not identifying individual users specifically. The spam and junk mail mentioned would be going to everyone on the list. And some people do not want this.

pcharles said:

What is privacy? If you do anything on the internet your privacy is toast. You'd be amazed how un-private you private things are. Just run a google search for your name or email address.

Click to expand...

Can you give us your name and email address so we can all try it.

amethystjw said:

"The author credits the trust in the App Store as the reason for the high opt-in rate."

Sure. I credit the lack of the words "spam", "advertisements" or "solicitations" in the vaguely worded message. Do you think they'd have 50% buy-in if the message were clear about its intentions?

Click to expand...

I think most people understand by clicking "yes" they will be opting for the "advertisements" and "solicitations." However, it would not be "spam" as the user is opting in. The trust part is where I think users are hoping it won't be abused and can be stopped later.

The trust part is a huge issue and wonder if the Android App store will have the same impact?

ten-oak-druid said:

Speaking of sharing information from mobile phones, be sure to warn Android users about the Geimini Virus.

(Android Malware is up 400%)

Click to expand...

What does this have to do with anything. How come every post you have to post something negative about Android or Microsoft when it has nothing to do with the topic or discussion at hand?

Mattie Num Nums said:

What does this have to do with anything. How come every post you have to post something negative about Android or Microsoft when it has nothing to do with the topic or discussion at hand?

Click to expand...

I had just come across that news. I don't like viruses or malware. And the particular virus I mentioned is related to the topic of stealing personal information off fro ma smart phone. So it is on topic.

And of course it is silly to be negative about android and MS. I could care less. But it gets under the skin of the "fanboy" hurlers...

ten-oak-druid said:

I had just come across that news. I don't like viruses or malware. And the particular virus I mentioned is related to the topic of stealing personal information off fro ma smart phone. So it is on topic.

And of course it is silly to be negative about android and MS. I could care less. But it gets under the skin of the "fanboy" hurlers...

Click to expand...

What are you talking about. You posted a totally unrelated article as a means to post your disdain for anything thats not Apple. You do it in every discussion. In fact you've already done it on both stories posted today. How about some relevant information related to Apple. This article was about people subscribing to Apple's privacy disclaimer not Android viruses.

Just goes to show that all these people "trusting" Apple forget that in this situation Apple is more of a middleman for the products they are presenting. Has nothing to do with Apple and more to do with the product itself.

Michael Scrip said:

But isn't the whole reason the publishers want the customer data is so they can remind them to renew their subscription?

Click to expand...

No. Magazine publishers want demographic information -- gender, age, zip code, income level, etc. -- so that they can present a demographic profile to their advertisers of who reads their magazine. The more targeted the ads are, the more publishers are willing to pay.

toddybody said:

One has nothing to do with the other. You can like/love a magazine, and still not want your private information to distributed.

Some folks like their privacy, as do I.

Click to expand...

At a time when people voluntarily provide massive amounts of information about themselves on Facebook, Twitter, comment forums, etc., it is surprising to hear so many people complain about a magazine company wanting to know their zip code, gender, etc. I mean, if you're switching from the print edition to the iPad edition of a magazine, they already have your zip code.

You don't mind MacRumors knowing that you have a 27-inch iMac, iPad 2, iPhone 4, etc., because you put it at the bottom of your posts. You probably provided other data when you signed up for your ID.

I just don't consider basic, generic, demographic data to be a privacy issue.

If that kind of data helps the magazine target the content or the ads to my age, where I live, my income range, what other magazines I like, etc., that's a good thing. I'm 38 years old; why should Time Magazine send me ads for denture cream if they can avoid it?

NebulaClash said:

Apple insists that you be presented with that choice up front.

Apple is standing up for the user's rights in this case, and I applaud their approach.

And yes, I say 'No' when asked, but thank you for at least asking.

Click to expand...

Hi NebulaClas,

According to the recent court hearings, Apple took information that users did not agree to share, so thats stealing correct?

stealingpresent participle of steal (Verb)
1. Take (another person's property) without permission or legal right and without intending to return it: "thieves stole her bicycle"; "she was found guilty of stealing from her employers"; "stolen goods".
2. Dishonestly pass off (another person's ideas) as one's own.

Click to expand...

What took place Tuesday at least my impression was that Sen. Franken was standing up for all americans, Justice for all and not just Google or Apple., Also, they did not take sides,

Why would you not agree what congress is trying to do for you as well, they did not wish to shut down Google or Apple, they just asked them to iron this out, it is all a warning though, they have a month and if they try to even do the same thing it will come back to them later and turn into a disaster.

Most people, like my dad think that's a good thing and say yes. And my dad doesn't even know where the spam is coming from.

caspersoong said:

Most people, like my dad think that's a good thing and say yes. And my dad doesn't even know where the spam is coming from.

Click to expand...

And thats a whole other story, If Apple did take users info regardless of the users decision it was stolen PERIOD, does not matter who else did it, they also should be monitored on regular bases just like tax payers are, i guess Apple knew this would last so long before laws clamped down on it.

SkyStudios said:

Hi NebulaClas,

According to the recent court hearings, Apple took information that users did not agree to share, so thats stealing correct?

Click to expand...

Not correct. Apple was building a database of cell and WiFi locations, with anonymized user data in the aggregate being collected. The furor was over a local database on your Mac that was not being deleted as it should have been. So if you ran an application on your own Mac, sure enough it could see your past travels in a rough form. That wasn't going to Apple except in a form that would not identify you.

Apple fixed this bug before the Congressional hearing. During the hearing, they were not found to have done anything wrong. So what did the hearing accomplish?

When this news first surfaced last year, I erased that location database file on my Mac. So when this news reappeared this year with that new app that could show you on the map where you had been, I tried it and it failed. Why? No location database file on my machine.

Not a big deal.