wordpress blog stats
Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

What are the issues around privacy and profiling in advertising and commerce? #PrivacyNama2022

This session of MediaNama’s flagship conference Privacy Nama 2022 explored user privacy expectations, data sharing protocols, and more

privacynama conference medianama

Key takeaways

  • People want privacy but do not know how to work on preserving it due to lack of awareness.
  • There are a lot of unintended consequences to unchecked data collection as companies are not scrutinised effectively.
  • It is a clear sign of user intent that they do not want to be tracked when majority of them opt for no tracking.
  • Transparency in itself will not address privacy concerns as one needs to promote privacy-preserving technologies.
  • App stores must do more to provide information on privacy practices of apps.
  • Every user has a legitimate expectation for privacy and does not want their data to be shared.

“…it’s not that people don’t have privacy preferences, what they don’t have is the imagination and awareness about how data is being collected, and how data is being used because nobody is transparent about collection of data,” Beni Chugh of Dvara Research said during a session on consumer expectations of privacy in online advertising and commerce at MediaNama’s PrivacyNama conference.

Chugh elaborated that the need for data protection and security to placate privacy concerns is “misplaced” because the priority of people is to prevent sharing of their personal data. She explained that people’s concerns about harms and data misuse comes later.

“…people want privacy; they would exert privacy preferences if only they knew that there is an assault on their privacy,” Chugh averred.

Chugh was joined by Debapratim Ray of Xiaomi, Finn Lützow-Holm Myrstad, Director of Digital Policy at the Norwegian Consumer Council (NCC), Udbhav Tiwari, Head of Global Product Policy at Mozilla, in a discussion moderated by Prasanto Kumar Roy of FTI Consulting, which dealt with issues like profiling, data monetisation, ethical and regulatory perspectives while balancing advertising and commerce agendas with consumer privacy.

MediaNama hosting these discussions with support from Mozilla, Meta, Walmart, Amazon, the Centre for Communication Governance at NLU Delhi, Access Now, the Centre for Internet and Society, and the Advertising Standards Council of India.


FREE READ of the day by MediaNama: Click here to sign-up for our free-read of the day newsletter delivered daily before 9 AM in your inbox.


Is profiling problematic?

Roy began the discussion by pointing out that Indians have fairly “low expectations” of privacy because consumers do not understand implications of sharing their data. He then went on to his panellists to gather their views on how profiling has changed the business model of advertising and the issues around it. Here is an overview of what was discussed:

Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.

Carries unintended consequences: Myrstad expressed his concern over the amount of data which is collected, whether on purpose or not, from users by all kinds of apps, and then sorted behind the scenes for profiling. He explained that profiling has several negative consequences at an individual level, apart from a lot of unintended consequences at the aggregated level because there’s little scrutiny around how data is collected. He raised several questions to highlight his concerns

  • Is it good data?
  • Is it bad data?
  • How do you interpret the data?
  • How do you set up the algorithm?
  • Is it checked for bias?
  • Is it audited by an independent third party?
  • Can the user go and correct the data?
  • How can they correct data if they do not even know that data exists in the algorithms?

“We are worried about the type of the business model that drives this because it is a system where it’s impossible to penetrate as a user because my data is shared with thousands of companies,” Myrstad cautioned.

Risk of discrimination: Myrstad said that profiling can fuel discrimination because it is easy for algorithms to distinguish between consumers depending upon their capacity to pay or they are aware that consumers have a particular weakness to certain things.

  • “They can put those ads in front of you at a time when you’re more vulnerable,” Lutzow explained, adding that tracking is so pervasive that one can infer personal details from bits of information from apps.
  • It includes everything from sexual orientation to political belief, whether one is depressed or not, whether one has a gambling problem, whether one has a predisposition to alcohol. He concluded that the system is prone to misuse.

Data free-for-all: Myrstad said that the world is in a situation where companies are grabbing a lot of data, and are not respecting fundamental principles of data protection and privacy, including human rights. He said that the situation is out of control due to which people are not using apps even when they need them. Myrstad advocated for purpose limitation in order along with safeguards around transparency and auditing.

Implementation must be the focus: Ray said that there isn’t a problem with profiling per se but its application where there is a potential for harm. It should be ensured that profiling does not end up causing any harm to users. He pointed out that users believe that they will only be able to avail a product or a service if they share information with a company so the concept of privacy is interlinked with user experience. It means that a user is unaware usually of how their information is used until they notice an ad following them across platforms.

Rethinking data collection: Tiwari explained that data collection is a reality and the focus should be on what is done with the data when it comes to advertising. “…the business model of the web is fundamentally broken. It depends, in its entirety almost, on massive amounts of data collection taking place…” He likened it to an arms race where some laws and technologies attempt to regulate it.

  • Examining privacy-preserving tech: Tiwari suggested that there are ways to do things that currently classify as profiling without collecting user data necessarily. He said that it attempts to figure out ways to target ads, to measure whether they’ve been successful, and to do a lot of other things without collecting user data fundamentally. He believed that if these justifications to collect data were to go away, it will make it easier to preserve privacy of users.
  • Companies must take responsibility: Tiwari remarked that companies, service providers, and regulators have to ensure that their choices are in the best interests of the user regardless of whether the law mandates it. It should be done  because it is bad for the brand as well as user experiences, as per Tiwari. He added that the idea of consumer expectations is a moot point from a regulatory perspective even if it is an important one.

Understanding transparency

Roy then moved on to the question of transparency and asked the panel about what kind of practices have worked to promote transparency and whether offering incentives to gather data is a viable option.

Not beneficial for only users: Tiwari opined that it was reductive to treat transparency as something that was only beneficial for users. The primary benefits of transparency include the ability to detect bad practices and understand what is happening which includes experts who use that information to push for change on behalf of users. He also batted for transparency in advertising over letting publishers know how much did people pay for this word, letting them know that this is the basis upon which the targeting took place, making them aware of how many people clicked on certain ads, and letting advertisers and publishers understand models better.

Clear signal of user intent: Tiwari stressed that the enforcement of ensuring privacy on app stores or with browser extensions reflects the reality that people are deeply uncomfortable with these practices. He cited the example of Apple’s ATT (App Tracking Transparency) where 97 per cent of the users have resisted tracking which signals the need for reform. He said that it is the reality of the future where people will be asked whether they want to be tracked or not. “It’s quite worrying that Google hasn’t done it yet. He said that Google and Apple should not be singled out over data collection as a lot of these practices are carried out by everybody and it’s important to divert attention from large technology platforms.

Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.

Will not address privacy concerns: Ray contended that transparency will not address users’ privacy concerns if one is linking these concerns with profiling. “Transparency, coupled with privacy-enhancing technologies is the way to go forward,” he said. Ray added that the problem with profiling is that no user has any visibility as to what profile applies to them, or why they are getting a particular choice.

  • Ex ante transparency: Ray stated that transparency is needed because there is an asymmetry between the user and the data collector. He advocated for ex ante transparency requirements as opposed to ex post facto transparency. It means that it will be better to offer transparency before data has been gathered instead of offering it later.
  • Future-proof transparency: Ray said that there was a need to be mindful of practical aspects of implementing transparency. The data is processed by advanced systems with machine learning so its algorithmic logic is capable of changing in the future, as per Ray. He said there is also a possibility of new datasets becoming available in the future so these factors will need to be remembered while developing safeguards to address profiling.

“The autonomy is that a user is compromising on by virtue of the lack of transparency is the issue primarily,” Ray said.

Buck stops at app stores: Chugh revealed that there is support on the ground for app stores to offer more clarity on privacy practices of apps. She said that the idea of rating apps’ privacy practices has been floating around for a couple of years. She offered the examples of rating apps based on how much data they collect and whether they follow purpose limitation. However, she added that the suggestion is fraught with problems as it can make app stores undemocratic suddenly which can make implementation tricky.

Transparency for regulators: Myrstad said that there was a need to think about transparency for regulators and investors. He said that it must be mandated by law. “We know now companies are not going to be transparent, they’ll be transparent about things they want to be transparent about and hide the things that they want to hide,” he asserted. The requirements should restrict companies’ abilities to define things, like trade secrets, according to Myrstad. It will help enforcement agencies to go look at the algorithms and get transparency, he added.

  • Ban on manipulative designs: Myrstad said that a ban on manipulative designs would be a good place to start, and then enforce these bans. He added that a law that is enforceable can promote informed choice.

Guarding against profiling by law enforcement

Roy thought it interesting to consider the ramifications of what can happen if historical data can be accessed by law enforcement.

Unwillingness to share data with government: Chugh said that there is a gap between the intent of the law and its enforcement. She said that there was no law in place but she added that consumers are discerning when it comes to sharing data especially with the government. She said that parties are not are not fungible and the relevance of why an agency is asking for data must be examined.

Legitimate expectation of privacy: Ray said that a user expects companies to whom they have given their personal information to respect the right to privacy even in cases of a government request. He, however, added that there is not a lot of wiggle room for companies if the requests are specific in their demand for personal information. He also said that there is no judicial precedence of such requests being overturned in the courts.

Must have stringent rules on data sharing: Myrstad said that companies are being bought by other companies constantly for various purposes. He used the example of Google’s Fitbit acquisition and said that a Fitbit user never consented to Google getting that data. He added that data safeguards are in line with basic human rights and no one must get access to the data in the future. “…data minimization is a very important principle,” Myrstad asserted. He advised companies against collecting more data than they need, and they must not retain it for longer than required, and they should not share it with other companies given the risk of data leakage.

Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.

This post is released under a CC-BY-SA 4.0 license. Please feel free to republish on your site, with attribution and a link. Adaptation and rewriting, though allowed, should be true to the original.

Also read:

Written By

I cover several beats such as Crypto, Telecom, and OTT at MediaNama. I can be found loitering at my local theatre when I am off work consuming movies by the dozen.

Free Reads

Drones

News

Once the system receives the required validation, five more such MDVs will be introduced into the Commissionerate Police fleet

News

The lure of Grok AI to Premium X Subscribers might let Musk salvage the decline in the social media usage in recent times.

News

Merchants win a significant battle against Visa and Mastercard's fee structure, but the war on fair charges is far from over.

MediaNama’s mission is to help build a digital ecosystem which is open, fair, global and competitive.

Views

News

NPCI CEO Dilip Asbe recently said that what is not written in regulations is a no-go for fintech entities. But following this advice could...

News

Notably, Indus Appstore will allow app developers to use third-party billing systems for in-app billing without having to pay any commission to Indus, a...

News

The existing commission-based model, which companies like Uber and Ola have used for a long time and still stick to, has received criticism from...

News

Factors like Indus not charging developers any commission for in-app payments and antitrust orders issued by India's competition regulator against Google could contribute to...

News

Is open-sourcing of AI, and the use cases that come with it, a good starting point to discuss the responsibility and liability of AI?...

You May Also Like

News

Google has released a Google Travel Trends Report which states that branded budget hotel search queries grew 179% year over year (YOY) in India, in...

Advert

135 job openings in over 60 companies are listed at our free Digital and Mobile Job Board: If you’re looking for a job, or...

News

By Aroon Deep and Aditya Chunduru You’re reading it here first: Twitter has complied with government requests to censor 52 tweets that mostly criticised...

News

Rajesh Kumar* doesn’t have many enemies in life. But, Uber, for which he drives a cab everyday, is starting to look like one, he...

MediaNama is the premier source of information and analysis on Technology Policy in India. More about MediaNama, and contact information, here.

© 2008-2021 Mixed Bag Media Pvt. Ltd. Developed By PixelVJ

Subscribe to our daily newsletter
Name:*
Your email address:*
*
Please enter all required fields Click to hide
Correct invalid entries Click to hide

© 2008-2021 Mixed Bag Media Pvt. Ltd. Developed By PixelVJ