Apple Accused of 'Hypocrisy' by Ad Industry Coalition Over Its Anti-Tracking Policy

[CarAnalogy]

Extremist? Really? Because people criticize advertisers tracking and profiling people and selling that data to the highest bidder, we’re extremists?

 

[CarAnalogy]

1. If today’s advertisers are unhappy, society is doing well. Modern advertising uses the Viennese method which is reverse psychology that markets to the subconscious. It works well but has a taste of trickery. Maybe it’s more than a taste. Malcolm Gladwell discusses this greatly in What The Dog Saw.

2. There is a great business model in Jim Collins’ classic Good To Great about the power of the “and”. Discuss and debate to find a way to disarm inverse relationships into situations where you can accomplish both. Advertisers can market their product “and” avoid ethical barriers.

3. Collins also talks about the success of Progressive Insurance getting a great return on bad luck when they embraced society’s distrust of insurance companies. When California voters passed a law requiring auto insurance companies to lower rates by ~20%, Progressive took the opportunity for serious soul searching and ended up going from #13 to #4, nationwide, for auto insurance.

4. Last time I checked, and I check rather often, Apple has, for a while now, been very transparent about what and where they track. I remember when the arrow came out, years before ATT made its debut, and how revolutionary it was just to see that you’re being tracked. Apple allows you to turn off tracking, even for the basics like Compass.

5. I think the big difference between Apple and Google and Meta is that Apple makes money selling products. Google and Meta make money commoditizing your data. Their current business model relies on selling information to advertisers. Maybe instead of fighting society, Google and Meta can fight their business mindset and embrace the change, much like Progressive Insurance, for the better.

Excellent points. I hope Apple isn’t dragged down to the advertising industry’s level completely. They are already starting down the dark path by heavily annoying their own users to subscribe to everything.

 

[TheOldChevy]

I am by far not fully satisfied on how Apple is managing my data and how "locked" I am in the ecosystem. But when I look at the competition, I know why I stay with Apple.

When I'll have more time to do everything myself, I may migrate to a Linux system (without Android upper layers), but for the time being Apple ecosystem offers me the best I can get for my needs.

 

[VampyricGentleman]

The way I see it is that the reason Apple aren’t asking you for permission to track in their own apps is because it’s implied consent as you own a device from the company that comes with the app preloaded most of the time

 

[nt5672]

We need an independent body with no skin the game (such as a government) to enact laws to protect consumers instead of them sitting back and do nothing. Make something like ATT the legal minimum.

The government never does any good in the long run.

 

[Rogifan]

If it’s between Apple and Google/Facebook, my trust will go to Apple every time.

Why? Because Apple’s business model is to sell people expensive hardware and thus their business isn’t primarily supported by advertising?

 

[russell_314]

If google and meta are upset then I'm happy and Apple is right.

Exactly this. These are the worst corporations saying this. If Facebook/ Zucky says something you can bet it's a lie

 

[d4cloo]

People tend to say "Company A might do that, but Company B does the same thing".
That might be a valid argument, but you can't stop there or nothing happens.
You also have to turn off your bias against or in favor of a company. If you really dislike Meta, it doesn't mean they are wrong. Similarly, you might love Apple, but that doesn't mean they are always right.

I think the argument posed of Apple being unfair in this respect is valid, and it should be addressed. And if does get addressed, Apple can use the same argument that was used against them to the likes of Meta and Samsung, and they will have to follow suit accordingly.

Apple, like any company, is a commercial entity and their ONLY goals are to protect share-holder value.

 

[moulderine]

Apple are 100% hypocrites, so much space on the iPhone ios is now used for advertising. If you use apple music app without a subscription its a joke now. SIGN UP 6 MONTHS FREE! I go to settings and even there they are pushing services. I thought i paid a premium to avoid this nonsense.

 

[DaSal]

The way I see it is that the reason Apple aren’t asking you for permission to track in their own apps is because it’s implied consent as you own a device from the company that comes with the app preloaded most of the time

Implied consent isn’t a thing when it comes to agreeing to terms of service/user agreement. At least not in the EU. Explicit consent is the name of the game.

 

[Robert.Walter]

Apple should consider suing this organization for misrepresentation, reputational damage and tortuous interference with its customers.

Even if Apple didn’t hold itself to the same standard, I wouldn’t mind because I trust Apple; I don’t trust Mr Cohen or his clients, at all.

Also, Mr Cohen and IAC should go pound sand.

 

[mrochester]

Apple are 100% hypocrites, so much space on the iPhone ios is now used for advertising. If you use apple music app without a subscription its a joke now. SIGN UP 6 MONTHS FREE! I go to settings and even there they are pushing services. I thought i paid a premium to avoid this nonsense.

I use the music app without a problem. Have you left ‘show apple music’ switched on in settings?

 

[macos9rules]

Of all of the big tech companies, Apple is the one I trust the most when it comes to security and privacy. Apple makes money by selling hardware, software and services, not with targeted advertisements like Meta and Google.

 

[VulchR]

Apple first blocking cross website tracking and then blocking tracking of apps and now requiring the consent was right. But we must all realise that the tracking of free service companies is not an attack of individual privacy but privacy in general.

This is a monetisation scheme. The advertisers can target you in a much more efficient way than mass media advertising, recommending you something that you might already think of purchasing. The ads sold this way are more expensive and generates more revenue for the ad-runners.

When I say you, it's the consumer.

Not you as John, Jack, Mary or any individual. No-one cares about who you are. But everyone cares about what kind of consumer you are (your likes, wonders, hobbies, people you are connected to etc)

As long as you're anonymous, meaning your personal, quantifiable information is not shared, your individual privacy is not breached.

You persona however, is.

If you're uncomfortable with your free apps tracking your usage across platforms and profiting on this date by allowing advertisers filer and target you as a consumer more efficiently, you should be able to opt out on that.

However this is just blocking one way of tracking consumers. There are other, predictive methods advertisers still can use to target you, ie shopping patters in brick and mortar shops, your CRM date from companies as well as banks, telephone companies and even the company you work for, titles etc.

Apple's privacy ads may result its users thinking that they are protecting your individual privacy (ie yourself, your SSN, your address, your bank number etc), which is true for ALL establishments. This is agains the law for far more long than this topic.

Apple just makes sure that you have the ability to opt out of the monetisation system that companies can target you as a consumer. That's it.

But they do however rise to a spotlight of privacy protectors and that USP is allowing them to gain a (false) competitive advantage, which is wrong.

Yes but if it is possible to use the information collected online about me to identify who I am, then I'd rather not have my data collected. And have no doubt that advertisers are using information to influence your buying patterns, which can cost you money, and sometimes this is done in a very implicit, hidden way. And it is not just companies peddling products doing this, but political organisations trying to amplify your views way beyond what you would normally believe.

 

[sjjones]

We need an independent body with no skin the game (such as a government) to enact laws to protect consumers instead of them sitting back and do nothing. Make something like ATT the legal minimum.

You honestly think government and politicians have "no skin in the game?"

 

[jarman92]

They are the same. If you investigate, Apple is using your data illegaly too.

None of these companies use our data "illegally," which is exactly the problem—the US doesn't have any data privacy laws.

But you're absolutely wrong that they're all the same. Apple is better by leaps and bounds.

 

[Sam Squanch]

"If you are making the right people mad. You are doing something right."

Though if Apple is being hypocritical I certainly want that to be found out, except me and the AIC have different opinions on what that outcome should be. I'm sure the AIC wants Apple to give up all this privacy talk and join them, whereas I and others want them to be duly punished for the deceit and stay true to what they say they are doing.

 

[d686546s]

Even if Apple didn’t hold itself to the same standard, I wouldn’t mind because I trust Apple; I don’t trust Mr Cohen or his clients, at all.

I don't know. I'm not expecting any angels in this space, but if it turned out that the company that put privacy and security front centre actually mined my data to sell ads and, when they said privacy, they actually just meant for their competitors, I think I'd be more upset than learning that a big advertising company like Google used my data for advertising.

Again, not saying that's what Apple's doing. I'd very much like to see evidence first, but I don't think there's any reason to trust Apple blindly.

 

[needsomecoffee]

Craig reminds me of Clinton fending off accusations. When he says no Apple apps "track" users... I guess he can say that because of "the meaning of app tracking". Apple is pretty much using app data to replicate the ad system Facebook used to have (narrowly defined targeting of ads by user interest/demo/psycho). They build these user tags with Apple iPhone data. Apple says "this is not Facebook" because they limit the group size minimum to not less than a few thousand. And they do not sell to or buy from third parties. Eg link:

Apple is building a demand-side platform

For some time now, Apple has given the impression that it doesn’t like online advertising.

digiday.com

 

[sw1tcher]

You can't force people to buy your product. I think Apple got to $2T by producing a product people want to buy.

You can say the same thing about Alphabet (Google) too then.

Google’s parent company briefly hits $2 trillion valuation

Alphabet has almost joined the ranks of Apple and Microsoft.

www.theverge.com

But somehow people call them evil

Google's 'Be Evil' business transformation is complete

I've read this stuff, says one dev. 'Either Google is screwed, or society is screwed'

www.theregister.com

If it's possible for Alphabet to be "evil" and reach $2T market cap, then the same can be true of Apple. Maybe it's just that Apple's better at hiding it/covering it up than others through their marketing. Reality distortion field?

 

[msackey]

I would very much like to see a researcher do a deep dive into both Apple's practices and the veracity of the accusations.

My current understanding is that Apple doesn't track its users by default. In fact, isn't there a "Personalized Ads" toggle? Ok, I just checked and there is. In iPhone, go to Settings > Privacy & Security > Apple Advertising > Personalized Ads (toggle on or off). I have always kept my off.

Seems to me that of all the consumer tech products company so far, Apple's privacy practice is top ranking.

 

[zchrykng]

They aren't wrong, but I think the solution is for Apple to stop tracking data rather than them lightening up on the creepy ad tech industry.

 

[ghanwani]

They deserve every bit of criticism they receive. Unfortunately, the smell of money is too sweet to resist, so the jawboning will continue.

 

[sw1tcher]

Apple is more responsible with the data and doesn’t sell it off. Can those competitors say the same? Still hypocracy when they’re held to different standards?

I say yes. Apple likes to talk up how their privacy setting allows you to control what/when/where/how information is shared

Privacy - Control

Apple products, including Apple Intelligence, are designed to protect your privacy, because privacy is a fundamental human right.

www.apple.com

"Settings have been carefully designed to put you in control of your data. You can adjust what information is shared, where you share it, and when it is backed up. And starting with iOS 14.5 and iPadOS 14.5, you’re more in control of how apps use your personal data to track you.

Your devices carry the story of your life. We believe you should have a choice in how apps track and share your data with other companies for advertising or with data brokers.

Apple gives you transparency and control over the data you share with apps. Apps may request access to things such as your location, contacts, calendars, or photos. You’ll receive a prompt with an explanation the first time a third-party app wants to use this data, so you can make an informed decision about granting permission."

Privacy

Apple products, including Apple Intelligence, are designed to protect your privacy, because privacy is a fundamental human right.

www.apple.com

"Privacy is a fundamental human right. It’s also one of our core values. Which is why we design our products and services to protect it. That’s the kind of innovation we believe in."


But when it comes to Apple's own apps, you have no such control. With Apple, it's always "the other companies" and "third-party apps"

If Apple truly cared about user privacy and truly believe it to be a fundamental human right, they would allow users to see and control what information is shared with Apple's own apps. Not doing so is hypocrisy.

Apple (Tim Cook) likes to give users more control over how their data is used and the choice with whom to share it... except when it comes to Apple.

I still want to contol what data I share with Apple even if they're less evil than others by not selling it off.

 

[zchrykng]

I would very much like to see a researcher do a deep dive into both Apple's practices and the veracity of the accusations.

My current understanding is that Apple doesn't track its users by default. In fact, isn't there a "Personalized Ads" toggle? Ok, I just checked and there is. In iPhone, go to Settings > Privacy & Security > Apple Advertising > Personalized Ads (toggle on or off). I have always kept my off.

Seems to me that of all the consumer tech products company so far, Apple's privacy practice is top ranking.

Some of the argument is that Apple defaults that switch to "on" and uses less aggressive language around their own data collection and ad targeting compared to third parties.

The solution is for Apple to stop collecting the data or use the same language for their own collection/usage, rather than lightening up on the ad vendors', which is what they want.