For example, Microsoft can help a DiningIn franchisee zero in on
working moms aged 30 to 40 in a given neighborhood with ads designed
to reach them before 10 AM when they’re most likely to be planning their
evening meal. Or if a person clicks on three Web sites related to auto insurance
and then visits an unrelated site for sports or entertainment, auto insurance
ads may show up on that site, in addition to the auto insurance
sites. This practice ensures that ads are readily apparent for a potential
customer likely to be in the market. Microsoft claims behavioral targeting
can increase the likelihood a visitor clicks an ad by as much as 76 percent.
Proponents of behavioral targeting maintain that consumers see
more relevant ads in this way. Because the ads are more effective as a
result, greater ad revenue is available to support free online content.
Spending on behavioral targeting is projected to grow to $4.4 billion or
8.6 percent of total online ad spending by 2012.
But consumers have significant misgivings about being tracked online
by advertisers. In one 2009 U.S. survey, about two-thirds of respondents
objected to the practice, including 55 percent of respondents aged 18 to 24.
Two-thirds of respondents also believed laws should give people the right to
know everything a Web site knows about them. Government regulators wonder
whether industry self-regulation will be sufficient or legislation is needed.
Proponents of behavioral targeting maintain that many consumers lack
full understanding of different tracking practices and would be less concerned
if they knew exactly how it worked. Their claims of anonymity and
privacy, however, have been weakened by events such as a leak at AOL of
online behavioral data in 2006 for 650,000 users and overly aggressive
attempts to institute data capture procedures at Facebook and various ISPs.
For example, Microsoft can help a DiningIn franchisee zero in on
working moms aged 30 to 40 in a given neighborhood with ads designed
to reach them before 10 AM when they’re most likely to be planning their
evening meal. Or if a person clicks on three Web sites related to auto insurance
and then visits an unrelated site for sports or entertainment, auto insurance
ads may show up on that site, in addition to the auto insurance
sites. This practice ensures that ads are readily apparent for a potential
customer likely to be in the market. Microsoft claims behavioral targeting
can increase the likelihood a visitor clicks an ad by as much as 76 percent.
Proponents of behavioral targeting maintain that consumers see
more relevant ads in this way. Because the ads are more effective as a
result, greater ad revenue is available to support free online content.
Spending on behavioral targeting is projected to grow to $4.4 billion or
8.6 percent of total online ad spending by 2012.
But consumers have significant misgivings about being tracked online
by advertisers. In one 2009 U.S. survey, about two-thirds of respondents
objected to the practice, including 55 percent of respondents aged 18 to 24.
Two-thirds of respondents also believed laws should give people the right to
know everything a Web site knows about them. Government regulators wonder
whether industry self-regulation will be sufficient or legislation is needed.
Proponents of behavioral targeting maintain that many consumers lack
full understanding of different tracking practices and would be less concerned
if they knew exactly how it worked. Their claims of anonymity and
privacy, however, have been weakened by events such as a leak at AOL of
online behavioral data in 2006 for 650,000 users and overly aggressive
attempts to institute data capture procedures at Facebook and various ISPs.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
