Several top publishers have attained low grades in a study of data privacy compliance. 

Neutronian’s Q1 2023 Data Privacy Score analyzed 800 media domains out of 3,000 companies rated overall.

The brands were rated for their privacy and compliance, data disclosures and company background. Multiple aspects were reviewed in each category, then scores calculated for each sector, leading to an overall score for each entity, the company says.  

The media brands with low rankings include the following, according a list sent to MediaPost by Neutronian:

1. Live Journal
2. Scrabble Word Finder
3. 22 Words
4. The Crazy Coupon Lady
5. USA Today
6. Bloomberg
7. IMDb
8. Bloglovin’
9. Cooking Light
10. Small Business Sense

Granted, this listing may or may not be accurate: It is based on one firm’s analysis, and brands would likely object to being included on it. But it reflects yet another challenge publishers face in the digital age. 

Neutronian says its analysis is based on:

• Automated/crawler tools—This includes data on the website or mobile app that is crawled and automatically collected directly from the domain/app itself or from publicly available sources.
• Human review--This analysis is done by Neutronian staffers trained in data collection and scoring methodologies. 
• Input from rated entities--Neutronian says it provides a web-based form where organizations can submit information or request review of their data privacy score based on publicly available information. 

The overall report was released in January. 

Congress, and not the Federal Trade Commission, should set a national privacy standard, the industry group Privacy for America is telling lawmakers.

“The regulation of the modern economy, which is data-driven in every way, should be a matter left to the democratically accountable legislative branch,” Privacy for America says in a letter sent Tuesday to lawmakers on the House Energy & Commerce Committee. “Agencies like the Federal Trade Commission should act only when directly instructed to do so by Congress through specific authorities contained in legislation.”

The letter was sent in advance of Wednesday morning's hearing on privacy by the Subcommittee on Innovation, Data, and Commerce.

That hearing will address “how personal data is currently treated and handled in today’s digital ecosystem and the dangers facing the U.S. if Congressional inaction continues,” according to the Republican staff memo.

Among other issues, the hearing will address how “the emerging patchwork of state laws” affects businesses, and the difference “between a company using first party data for advertising and transferring such data to a third party for advertising.”

“Advertising in the digital age has prompted Americans to question how their information is collected, processed, and transferred,” the staff memo states. “Many Americans certainly appreciate the ease of shopping online that comes with different advertising practices. However, the American people deserve more transparency into the ways in which theses targeted advertising practices exploit their data and should be granted more autonomy to decide how they want to participate in the digital advertising ecosystem.”

The hearing comes as the FTC considers issuing privacy regulations that could affect companies' ability to collect and harness online data for advertising.

Privacy for America -- whose members include the American Association of Advertising Agencies, Association of National Advertisers, Digital Advertising Alliance, Interactive Advertising Bureau and Network Advertising Initiative -- previously urged the FTC to refrain from issuing broad privacy rules.

The umbrella industry group also argues in its letter to Congress that privacy legislation should prohibit companies from “meddling” with other businesses' ability to collect data.

“No company, just because of its position in the marketplace as the intermediary between consumers and publishers, should be able to interfere in the legitimate, responsible, data practices of others,” the letter states. “This is especially true when those private actors do so to further their own financial goals to the detriment of their competitors. A federal law should prohibit such meddling.”

The letter doesn't mention any companies by name, but ad organizations have previously criticized Apple for mobile privacy settings that require app developers to obtain users' opt-in consent to tracking, and Google for its plan to block ad-tech companies' cookies.

While the ad industry supports a bill that would override state laws, others argue that states should be able to enforce their own, more stringent privacy standards.

California Governor Gavin Newsom, Attorney General Rob Bonta, and California Privacy Protection Agency executive director Ashkan Soltani urged federal lawmakers to avoid passing federal legislation that would override California's law.

The bipartisan American Data Privacy And Protection Act, which advanced last year in the House Energy and Commerce Committee, would have effectively invalidated the bulk of California's privacy law.

Newsom and the others specifically argue that the American Data Privacy and Protection Act should be amended so that it no longer trumps California's privacy law.

“Given the reality of technology’s rapid pace, Americans would be best served by a strong federal privacy law that also allows states to continue our legislative efforts to protect our residents,” Newsom and the others say in a letter sent to Congress on Tuesday. “Passing a strong federal law today that remains strong tomorrow must be reinforced with language that allows the states to legislatively innovate and respond in real-time to emerging consumer protection issues.”

Some consumers welcome text messages from brands. They also respond to them: 38% have purchased a service and 50% have bought a product after receiving a timely promotional ping or a reminder of an abandoned cart via SMS, according to a new international study by Validity. 

But text remains an iffy channel for marketers who use it badly. For instance, 96% of shoppers have at least occasionally been annoyed by irrelevant texts about products they have already purchased. And, of those, 28% have stopped doing business with the offending brands, and 14% have left negative public reviews. 

The problems are perceived lack of purchase history knowledge and blatant disregard for customer communication preferences, the company states.

“Marketers who’ve mastered the art of SMS are able to create campaigns that increase customer engagement and satisfaction, and ultimately drive revenue for their business, says Kate Adams, senior vice president of marketing at Validity. 

But Adams adds that “the findings of this report are also a cautionary tale because the opposite is equally true. When SMS is done poorly, businesses risk alienating large swaths of customers.”

Another problem is frequency — 49% feel excessive texting is the most annoying aspect of SMS. But 97% would welcome customized frequency, and 81% say it would make them more likely to buy from a brand. 

Email teams shouldn’t worry that texting is going to soon supplant email: only 19% rank SMS as their preferred communication channel, above email, social media, direct mail and app notifications. 

Privacy is another factor —70% fear texts might pose a data risk. And, of those, 66% worry about brands selling their data or fear clicking a link leading to a scammer. 

That doesn’t stop 66% of those who are concerned about a data risk from signing up to garner rewards, such as company updates, shipping notifications and free merchandise. Drilling down, 16% would like to receive these messages from brands 2-3 times per week.  

Adams concludes that “many marketers don’t know how to incorporate SMS effectively, and often attempt to apply age-old email marketing tactics--which aren’t effective in this medium.”

But, when complemented with email, text has enabled brands to reach an array of customers directly on their personal mobile device, the company notes. 

Validity surveyed 1,200 SMS, text, and WhatsApp users across the United States, United Kingdom, Australia and New Zealand.

Mediaocean this morning announced its Flashtalking ad-serving unit and its Protected Media ad-fraud mitigation service have received additional accreditations from the Media Rating Council (MRC), making their integrated tech stack the only independent ad server reporting MRC-accredited CTV impressions, desktop and mobile viewability and sophisticated invalid traffic (SIVT).

Mediaocean, which acquired Flashtalking and its Protected Media unit in 2021 is the primary media-buying processing platform used by major ad agencies to plan, buy and pay media.

This morning’s announcement did not delineate what the additional accreditation encompasses, per se, but the MRC previously announced that in October 2021, Protected Media was granted a new accreditation for both general and sophisticated invalid traffic detection and filtration covering digital display and video and CTV inventory; and continued accreditation for rendered viewable ad impressions across those platforms and formats.

In December 2021, the MRC voted to accredit Flashtalking’s display and rich-media ads requested and rendered ad impressions reported within device reports in desktop, mobile web, and mobile in-application environments; and continued accreditation for video ads requested and rendered ad impressions reported within Device Reports in desktop, mobile web, and mobile in-application environments.

Ryan Reynolds and his ad agency, Maximum Effort, are once again promoting his mobile brand, Mint Mobile, in a unique way, this time by partnering with QSR Jack in the Box.

The ad, breaking Feb. 27, features Reynolds explaining how Mint Mobile can offer its service for $15 a month. “It’s because we sublet our ads,” says Reynolds as the ad turns into a pitch for Jack in the Box and its new Mint Mobile shake. “That’s right, we even sublet their name,” says the Jack character from Jack in the Box ads.

The spot comes after previous Mint ads, one in which Reynolds used ChatGPT to create an ad, and another that casts Harvey Fierstein as Sir Isaac Newton.

A federal appeals court has agreed to hear Google's appeal of a district court judge's order allowing consumers to proceed with a class-action over app store policies that allegedly resulted in inflated fees.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals' move, announced Monday, comes in sprawling antitrust litigation against Google over allegedly anti-competitive policies in its app marketplace. Google is facing lawsuits by consumers, developers, and a coalition of state attorneys general for allegedly hindering consumers' ability to download apps from sources other than the Play store.

The claims center on allegations that Google uses anti-competitive tactics to ensure that app developers distribute through the Google Play store, where Google charged commissions of up to 30%. Google, unlike Apple, has always allowed consumers to “sideload” apps -- that is, to download them from sources other than the Play store -- but the lawsuits allege that the company discourages users from doing so.

The company recently agreed to settle some developers' claims, but is still fighting cases by the consumers and attorneys general.

Last November, U.S. District Court Judge James Donato said the consumers could proceed on a class-wide basis, and certified a class of 21 million consumers who made purchases involving apps.

Google recently asked the 9th Circuit to hear an immediate appeal of that order, arguing that most consumers weren't affected financially by Google's fees for developers.

“Although plaintiffs are consumers, they allege that as a result of anticompetitive conduct, Google’s developer service fee is too high. Their claims thus depend on a 'pass-through' theory: They are injured only if developers would have passed the benefit of lower service fees through to consumers via lower prices,” Google wrote.

The company argued that “real-world data” disproves that pass-through theory, writing that developers “almost never” lower their prices in response to a lower service fee.

“When Google actually lowered service fees, developers lowered prices for about 2% of products,” the company argued. “For the vast majority of 21 million consumers in the class, a lower service fee for developers would not have resulted in a lower price, which means the vast majority of the class is uninjured,” Google contended.

Apple continues to make moves to ramp-up its advertising business.

The most recent is hiring digital video and TV advertising executive Lauren Fry, hired to build advertising for Apple TV+, according to a new report from The Information.

Fry was previously chief revenue officer for digital video ad tech firm Simulmedia, and earlier held ad sales roles at AT&T and Comcast.

Fry’s specific position at Apple isn’t yet known.

Apple has been building a demand-side platform (DSP) to enable it to control ad buys across its portfolio of services and products. 

The company created a team to sell ads and sponsorships for its deals to stream Major League Baseball and Major League Soccer, and has reportedly been building a live television ad network as part of the MLS deal.

Unlike its major competitors, Apple TV+ does not yet have an ad-supported tier, but that intention has been long rumored, in part as a means of subsidizing increasingly costly content that drives subscriptions and engagement.

Last fall, agency media and advertising networks executives reported that Todd Teresi, Apple vice president of ad platforms, was meeting with them, in part to explore adding ads to Apple TV+ programming.

Apple’s estimated $4 billion ad business — at present largely driven by its search advertising — is small by tech giant standards.

But with an iPhone install base of more than 1 billion, plus nearly that many paid services subscriptions, JP Morgan analyst Samik Chatterjee last year projected that Apple could realize $6 billion in search advertising driven by mobile advertising by 2025.

Apple wants to increase its ad business to $10 billion, according to Bloomberg.

Apple’s App Tracking Transparency feature giving iPhone users the ability to opt out of ad tracking has benefitted Apple’s ad share (it had risen to 15% by last fall) while undermining Facebook’s ad business.

But Apple also has been genuinely cautious about privacy issues’ potential for alienating both its iPhone user base and the subscribers to its services, which are its primary growth strategy focus.

Last year, the company began restructuring the services division to put more focus on streaming and advertising.

In January, after VP of Services Peter Stern left the company, his responsibilities were reportedly reassigned to Robert Kondrk, VP of services product and design, and Adrian Perica, VP of corporate development. Oliver Schusser, VP of Apple Music and Beats, is also now involved in Apple TV+’s management.

Apple has also expanded advertising availabilities in its App Store and is reportedly planning to start serving search ads in the location-based app in Maps sometime this year.