May 31, 2018 — By: George Slefo, Advertising Age
The EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) came into force last week, and Advertising Age explores how publishers are taking different approaches to consent under the new regulation.
"Some publishers provide an easy way to opt out of being tracked," wrote Advertising Age. "Others ... don't. And one offers an ad-free, no-tracking version of its subscription (for a higher price)."
"Asking consumers to pay their way out of tracking seems to be permitted under GDPR, which carries fines of roughly $25 million or 4 percent of global revenue, whichever is larger," Advertising Age wrote. "The Article 29 Data Protection Working Party, which is largely responsible for interpreting the rules of GDPR, [initially] said charging extra money for an ad-free, no-tracking experience was not allowed." However, that stance was changed in April, Advertising Age noted.
The GDPR has only been in place for one week, and "[t]he law didn't say publishers must carve their approach in marble," Jay Seirmarco, senior VP of operations and legal affairs at Pixalate, is quoted as saying in Advertising Age. "The first phase was compliance, so they may be offering a compliant solution and taking a wait-and-see approach to see how everything shakes out."
Read the full article on Advertising Age.
Sign up for our blog to stay updated with new stats, trends, and analysis of digital ad fraud.
*By entering your email address and clicking Subscribe, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
These Stories on Thought Leadership
*By entering your email address and clicking Subscribe, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Disclaimer: The content of this page reflects Pixalate’s opinions with respect to the factors that Pixalate believes can be useful to the digital media industry. Any proprietary data shared is grounded in Pixalate’s proprietary technology and analytics, which Pixalate is continuously evaluating and updating. Any references to outside sources should not be construed as endorsements. Pixalate’s opinions are just that - opinion, not facts or guarantees.
Per the MRC, “'Fraud' is not intended to represent fraud as defined in various laws, statutes and ordinances or as conventionally used in U.S. Court or other legal proceedings, but rather a custom definition strictly for advertising measurement purposes. Also per the MRC, “‘Invalid Traffic’ is defined generally as traffic that does not meet certain ad serving quality or completeness criteria, or otherwise does not represent legitimate ad traffic that should be included in measurement counts. Among the reasons why ad traffic may be deemed invalid is it is a result of non-human traffic (spiders, bots, etc.), or activity designed to produce fraudulent traffic.”