Europe Wants to Cut Down on Annoying GDPR Cookie Pop-Ups

[Unregistered 4U]

This is long overdue! it's wild that this has persisted for as long as it has. I can understand why some might want to keep it on a site-by-site basis, but at the very least, the notification should be standardized across all sites with one-click options for "decline all", "only necessary", and "accept all". That's it. It really really needs to be standardized. I hate how every site does it differently and how some try to make it difficult to only accept necessary cookies.

While we're at it, please ban those terribly rude popups that get in your face while scrolling down an article, just to ask you to signup for some BS email list or other nonsense that I have no interest in. Those popups are infuriating.

See, THAT’S like BASIC level knowledge for anyone even tangentially connected to tech. It’s not surprising that the EU regulators, having successfully driven all world class tech companies out of the region, have no one they can check with to see if what they’re planning to rule on will allow sites wide variances on how to implement.

It feels like EU regulations are always designed to be so loose such that unintended consequences are the norm rather than the exception.

 

[Unregistered 4U]

What? Why are we throwing away the baby with the bathwater!?

Sure, get rid of utterly pointless cookie notices, but why this?

Because, while the EU has no more tech companies, and the regulations pretty much forbid them to exist once they get so large, they do still have ad companies. As those companies want to make more money, the only way that can happen is to relax the legislation. I wonder what other outcomes are on their way as the EU slides further and further into tech obscurity?

 

[Unregistered 4U]

I don't like the idea of the EU requiring browsers to build anything. I do like the idea of requiring any organization who wants to store cookies or track users being required to accept a pre-formatted/standard selection that could be stored in a browsers setting (if the browser author wants it there), ideally this could be global or a per website (or organization) preference. If there is no preference response then the site has to pop-up the consent form.

If the EU wants a new browser standard, they should do what everyone else does propose it and, if it has merit, it becomes a part of the standard OR design their own browser and see it rise in marketshare until what they wanted implemented becomes the de facto standard.

Unfortunately for the EU, they’d need world class tech companies to do either and the regulators took care of that years ago.

 

[LowKeyed]

Dude it’s already happening, look at theVerge ))) and other popular sites. You need subscription to see full articles, I know I can go around but by default they already restrict you

I have no problem with companies using different business models and if they choose to monetize that way, so be it. And honestly, few things annoy me more than the combined ads + subscription model.

What I do have a problem with is outlawing an entire business model that, historically, is one of the few reasons people with limited means ever got access to information in the first place.

Advertising has a long, complex, and ugly history for sure, but we tend to forget the good parts because the modern implementation is so obnoxious. Lets be fair, ad supported content is basically what democratized literacy.

Before newspapers were cheap(because of ads), everyday people could read, but they didn’t have much to read. Books were expensive, scholarly journals didn’t apply, and early newspapers for the upper classes cost a small fortune. Reading wasn't something you did much unless you had money and leisure. The bible was probably the only easily accessible "content" available to everyone (I'm not sure that is actually healthy for society or individuals)

When papers shifted to ad revenue, suddenly the price dropped to the point where working class people could afford them. That changed everything, you got mass readership, access to current events, and opinion (some good, some bad, but it helped create public discourse), and eventually mass literacy because reading finally had a practical purpose. Content drove practice, practice created proficiency.

Does current ad-driven content have major problems? 100% yes. It rewards outrage and spectacle over nuance and quality. It pushes algorithms to feed you whatever keeps you scrolling. It is toxic.

But imagine a world where everything online required a subscription or credits. No free search engines. No freely accessible news. You'd have moment where “I need to check this, but I'm out of search credits, so I'll wait until they reset on Monday” .

Simple things like, “Is this rash dangerous?”, “What does a brown recluse actually look like?”, “Is this medication okay to take together?”, and the most important “When does the next Marvel movie drop?”

Without ad-supported services, those kinds of everyday, practical questions become paywalled. And the people who can’t afford twenty different subscriptions are the ones who lose access first.

The ad model is flawed (maybe even broken). But it also opened doors that had never been open before, we should not close them now. It should be fixes, not outlawed.

 

[turbineseaplane]

AD models are fine.

They can and should be limited however.

The world continued on just fine when ADs weren't yet capable of being hyper targeted, creepy and invasive.

It's fair to limit the allowance of that, now that it's so possible, so there is a balance here.

 

[DblHelix]

AD models are fine.

They can and should be limited however.

The world continued on just fine when ADs weren't yet capable of being hyper targeted, creepy and invasive.

It's fair to limit the allowance of that, now that it's so possible, so there is a balance here.

As someone in advertising I hate some forms of advertising, midrolls are my biggest complaint. But to be 100% honest we do not need the level of measurement we have had for the last nearly 20 years. We got along fine with basic targeting (aligning ads based on the site or section of a site someone was in, on tv shows we knew a decent percent of our audience watched, etc), measurement also does not need all of the data we have we can still do lift studies by segmenting out a media buy to similar markets and looking at lift vs a market not getting a specific type of ad. In fact I would argue the vast amount of data has led us to worse outcomes. Branding tends to move the needle and convert more people than highly personalized ads we have kind of gotten into because of the data we have at our fingertips.

 

[turbineseaplane]

As someone in advertising I hate some forms of advertising, midrolls are my biggest complaint. But to be 100% honest we do not need the level of measurement we have had for the last nearly 20 years. We got along fine with basic targeting (aligning ads based on the site or section of a site someone was in, on tv shows we knew a decent percent of our audience watched, etc), measurement also does not need all of the data we have we can still do lift studies by segmenting out a media buy to similar markets and looking at lift vs a market not getting a specific type of ad. In fact I would argue the vast amount of data has led us to worse outcomes. Branding tends to move the needle and convert more people than highly personalized ads we have kind of gotten into because of the data we have at our fingertips.

Shout it from the rooftops!
I agree wholeheartedly.