Behavioural targeting can be a confusing and controversial subject. But despite the concern of some consumers and privacy advocates, marketers have defended behavioural targeting on the basis that internet users would prefer to look at relevant advertisements and offers. In simplistic terms, behavioural targeting first delivers what you like based on where you go online. Then, it selects ads that are most likely to influence you (based on your journey to that point) and then displays them on the new web pages you select.

 Last month, the UK’s largest online companies, including Microsoft, AOL, Google, Sky and Yahoo! All met in London to convince brands that behavioural targeting is the only way to run a successful online campaign. According to the Global Director of Targeting at Microsoft, James Colborn, behavioural targeting offers lower reach at a higher CPM, but allows brands to compose the audience it wants to target – what can be more valuable than that? Whilst most people think of Google as a search company, they are better understood as an advertising company that draws customers by giving away innovative services, like its search engine. That strategy has elevated Google to collect more the 5 billion in ad revenue on the first 3 months of 2009. But even now Google is moving into the behavioural targeting field by monitoring what users do online, including what they watch and upload onto YouTube.

 However, many of these behavioural targeting companies have a public image crisis on their hands, where, after a study done at various universities across the States, found that over 2/3 of the American public do not want to be tracked online by advertisers, with this number growing to 86% when the users were informed what behavioural targeting entailed. This suggests that while marketers are pushing the benefits of behavioural targeting, they should also implement a regime of ‘information respect’ to the public and work with policy makers to open up process so that individuals can know exactly how their information is being collected and used.

 For example, Phorm is a global personalisation company in the UK and US that makes content and advertising more relevant to consumers. Whereas Google’s advertising relies solely on its own database to ‘target’ its adverts (this is based on the content of the page you are viewing, it doesn’t use any kind of browsing history unless you opt in – by creating a Google account), Phorm targets its advertising based solely on your browsing history which it collects directly from your ISP. You are automatically opted in to this which means your browsing details will be automatically sent to Phorm by default from your ISP and the user would then have to opt out on EVERY browser that uses your network connection.

Although they don’t actually store any personally identifiable information or interface with any of the ISP systems, they assign a unique tracking ID relating directly to the user’s browsing profile. Initially 3 of the UK’s largest ISP’s had signed on this platform (which was due to launch in 2007) at which the ISP’s hadn’t even announced it in the UK press, they found out via the New York Times! However, after more than a year and a half of bad publicity and pressure on Phorm’s ‘suspect’ technology, 2 of the 3 ISP’s have now withdrawn any plans to implement the technology on their networks (go to badphorm  for more information)

 Advanced marketers have been leveraging behavioural targeting for a long time. We aren’t talking about a shift in the advertising paradigm here – just increased technology that can make this happen on a much more real-time basis. So as transparency becomes the norm and popular companies like Google approach their many users about providing a better user experience, behavioural targeting could possibly be an integral part of your Web experience soon.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.