Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Advertising Groups Ask Apple to 'Rethink' New Cookie Tracking Standards in Safari 11

MacRumors

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
68,284
39,094



safari-icon-250x250.jpg
In the upcoming version of Safari 11 on macOS High Sierra, Apple will implement a new "Intelligent Tracking Prevention" feature that builds upon Safari's default blocking of third-party cookies. ITP will greatly limit advertiser reach by placing new safeguards into Safari that use machine learning to suppress cross-site tracking and purge ad retargeting data after 24 hours.

In response, six trade and marketing organizations have written an open letter to Apple asking for the Cupertino company to "rethink" its plan to launch Safari with these new "arbitrary" cookie standards (via AdWeek).

The organizations argue that the Internet's infrastructure depends on consistent standards for cookies, saying that Apple's new ruleset could "sabotage the economic model for the Internet."

On the consumer side of things, the organizations stated that the blocking of cookies in Apple's manner will result in ads that are "more generic" for users, while also being "less timely and useful." The signed organizations include: American Association of Advertising Agencies, American Advertising Federation, Association of National Advertisers, Data & Marketing Association, Interactive Advertising Bureau, and Network Advertising Initiative.
We are deeply concerned about the Safari 11 browser update that Apple plans to release, as it overrides and replaces existing user-controlled cookie preferences with Apple's own set of opaque and arbitrary standards for cookie handling.

Apple's unilateral and heavy-handed approach is bad for consumer choice and bad for the ad-supported online content and services consumers love. Blocking cookies in this manner will drive a wedge between brands and their customers, and it will make advertising more generic and less timely and useful. Put simply, machine-driven cookie choices do not represent user choice; they represent browser-manufacturer choice. As organizations devoted to innovation and growth in the consumer economy, we will actively oppose any actions like this by companies that harm consumers by distorting the digital advertising ecosystem and undermining its operations.
Click to expand...
On Apple's WebKit site, the company explains that Intelligent Tracking Prevention is meant to ensure user trust is kept during the web browsing experience on Safari, because "the success of the web as a platform relies on user trust." Also coming in Safari on High Sierra is an autoplay blocking feature, which will prevent videos from automatically playing when you open up a web page. This morning, Google announced a similar feature is coming to Chrome in January 2018.

The new Safari will launch when macOS High Sierra becomes available for download on Monday, September 25.

Article Link: Advertising Groups Ask Apple to 'Rethink' New Cookie Tracking Standards in Safari 11
 
Article Link
https://www.macrumors.com/2017/09/15/advertising-cookie-standards-safari/
The new Intelligent Tracking Prevention only helps increase consumer privacy.

Google has already modified AdWords in order to work within the requirements Apple offers.

It seems other advertiser are just lazy and want to continue tracking consumers as much as they like, without Apple looking out for their privacy.

Seems this article misses the biggest problem advertisers see here. It's not the release of High Sierra on the 25th but rather iOS 11 which also includes ITP. Mobile Safari makes up as much as 50% of mobile web browsing (yes the browser accounts for less than Android but iOS users have been shown to browse much more than Android users). To lose tracking on 50% of mobile traffic would be a HUGE blow to many advertisers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mackiwilad, Ntombi, HippyRabbitFish and 18 others
As someone who works in paid media, this is going to be a pain in the butt. Retargeted marketing is very effective. Plus if you're going to get ads, do you want them to be for stuff you actually like? A lot of the time special deals are offered to people with targeted marketing.

EDIT: For all those quoting and saying targeting ads don't work...

Ad suppression is vital to effective retargeting ads; picking when and what to show ads for and turning them off after purchase or when no interest is shown. Simply showing ads for anything and everything someone looks at forever is lazy marketing that does not work as well.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: CAWjr, NightFox, SteveJobzniak and 1 other person
Anything that offers up more privacy and fewer ads is gold for me. I want to be respected as a consumer, able to make my own choices about my needs, seek them out on my own and be helped by knowledgeable people when I want information on what to purchase. I do not want to be some kind of Pavlovian lab experiment to see what temptation at what level of obtrusiveness based on past behaviour (which quite frankly is no one's damned business) will most make me want to spend money.

Find another way to monetize your business. And no, finding that way for you is not on me as a consumer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kalsta, token787, mackiwilad and 20 others
As opposed to the unilateral heavy handed approach of the advertisers. If they hadn't gone all intrusive on us none of this would be necessary. The advertisers crossed the line first, this is a proportionate response, each time attempts have been made to block them with user controls the advertisers have ignored them or found a way round them. Users and companies like Apple have tried being respectful, advertisers have no one but themselves to blame for this. They need to rework their model to work without treating our personal data as their property to be sold on to whomever they wish.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kalsta, chromos, mijail and 38 others
Number 41 said:
Content on the internet costs money to produce. Advertising pays the bills for site hosting and content creation.

I don't know why people revel in blocking the revenue streams that grant them these things.
Click to expand...

Sadly many miss this point. Advertisement is how many of the sites we enjoy (including MacRumors) exist. They can't pay their bills without advertisements. If you want your favorite site to continue operating and providing you with great content, you really should allow advertisements on that site (whitelist them with your ad blocker).

The problem is bad advertisers. Sites that overdo the ads and ad networks with annoying ads. They ruin it for many sites and give ads a bad name. Google works hard to make sure their ad are high quality, relevant, and not annoying.
[doublepost=1505487547][/doublepost]
jayducharme said:
Yes, there's nothing I love more than being deluged with pop-up ads.
Click to expand...

Blame the site you're visiting. They're the one putting bad ads on their site. If you're seeing pop-up ads, it's not a Google ad. It's likely a low-quality ad network on a crappy website.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CAWjr, NightFox, fermat-au and 5 others
Number 41 said:
Content on the internet costs money to produce. Advertising pays the bills for site hosting and content creation.

I don't know why people revel in blocking the revenue streams that grant them these things.
Click to expand...
Paying for internet access costs money too. I'm already paying to use the internet I'm not going to be looking at banner add I'm never going to click.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mackiwilad, DCW, Tronic and 8 others
applesith said:
As someone who works in paid media, this is going to be a pain in the butt. Retargeted marketing is very effective. Plus if you're going to get ads, do you want them to be for stuff you actually like? A lot of the time special deals are offered to people with targeted marketing.
Click to expand...

If you're using AdWords, they've already updated things. You do have to have your AdWords and Analytics account linked though, or Google will estimate the conversions after 24 hours. The new tracking places a 1st party cookie with Analytics, rather than a 3rd party with AdWords.
 
OldSchoolMacGuy said:
If you're using AdWords, they've already updated things. You do have to have your AdWords and Analytics account linked though, or Google will estimate the conversions after 24 hours. The new tracking places a 1st party cookie with Analytics, rather than a 3rd party with AdWords.
Click to expand...

I'm concerned about my clients running Adobe Analytics with Google's ad suite. Have you seen anything about how DMPs are potentially working around this?
 
  • Like
Reactions: CAWjr
MacNut said:
Paying for internet access costs money too. I'm already paying to use the internet I'm not going to be looking at banner add I'm never going to click.
Click to expand...

The argument you just made if essentially what those against Net Neutrality are proposing. You'll have to pay in order to access the internet and the sites you want.

"I already bought a car, I shouldn't have to pay a cent for the roads I drive it on."
 
  • Like
Reactions: G5isAlive, 5105973 and forwardthinking
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back