Advertising is a cultural staple in the United States. The notion of advertising as a way to persuade prospective buyers to purchase products is about as American as listening to country music while eating apple pie. It is ironic that such public disdain exists against advertising.

Advertising is often responsible for inspiring our appearance. A fashion statement serves to characterize the individual wearing the brand. Simultaneously, the brand exudes a status per designation by the company’s positioning in the marketplace. Thanks to the strong messages and targeted research, people are able to identify and even interact with a brand that is similar to them.

On the contrary, advertising proves to be a major nuisance when perusing the Internet. Websites, regardless of legitimacy or funding, are all subject to targeted banner and pop-up advertising.

The beauty and artfulness of advertising on the Internet, coupled with advanced tracking methods, increase advertising effectiveness. At this juncture, controversy stirs.

Congress has started discussions regarding the contentious issue of online advertisement tracking. The “Do Not Track” bill that is still being debated within the Federal Trade Commission would seek to go beyond the current measures in place to ensure the privacy of Internet browsers across the country.

Traditionally, the notion of stealing a glimpse of the billboard advertising Fruit of the Loom underwear is fairly anonymous. Fruit of the Loom bought the billboard to attract attention, and each impression the company has on an individual signifies money well spent.

If Fruit of the Loom decides to purchase banner ads on The New York Times website, the company has the ability to not only design an appealing ad, but it can also collect data regarding the success of the campaign on a micro or macro level.

Tracking cookies or small packets of data stored on the browser can report long-term data, such as viewing time, click-through rate, viewer IP address and browsing history. These data are compiled and interpreted in an effort to shape both the placement of these ads within an ad network and mold advertising strategy for future campaigns.

Corporations have built their current online presence based upon their ability to harness these tracking capabilities and deliver relevant products for current customers according to the collected data. Opposition agencies have articulated these targeted ads and unwarranted data mines are intrusions on consumers’ privacy when surfing the Internet.

The World Wide Web Consortium sets the current successful industry regulation standards. This program mandated an icon at the bottom of the targeted ad. When clicked, a window opens explaining why that specific ad appeared. This campaign has more than a 90-percent compliance rate industry wide.

Unfortunately this inevitable debate will be delayed because the consortium has yet to come up with a firm definition of what “Do Not Track” means. The online advertising behemoth is worth roughly $300 billion and accounts for up to 3.1 million jobs in the United States, according to calculations by the Interactive Advertising Bureau.

Staunch critics have exclaimed that if restrictions are heavily imposed, the law would stifle creativity and the viability of new entrepreneurial ventures.

Since many small Internet ventures rely heavily on highly targeted ads, it would be challenging for these companies to successfully monetize. This would also mean a small business’s venture capital funding could dry up sooner.

If the venture capital funding dries up faster, it will be far more challenging for these new digital start-up businesses to monetize and become self-sustaining.

Jared Rosen is a sophomore advertising and marketing management major. His column appears weekly. He can be contacted at jmrose03@syr.edu or followed on Twitter at @jaredmarc14.

 

Published on September 25, 2012 at 2:36 am