Group items tagged

"The last quarter of 2009 should be partly remembered in the advertising community as a juncture when big agencies -- namely Omnicom Media Group, The Nielsen Company, and WPP -- announced consumer data mergers. The deals entailed the marriages of offline and online data and appeared to reveal a potentially major stepping stone in the evolution of "hyper-targeting." Some of the agencies have trumpeted their newfound ability to create consumer segments related to behavioral elements such as "passion points" (e.g., shown interest in electronics, photography, fantasy football, etc.), as well as geographic location, beverage preferences, favorite social media sites, activity levels at the sites, and so on. Augustine Fou, group chief digital officer for Omnicom's Healthcare Consultancy Group and a ClickZ columnist, said that while increased hyper-targeting would likely result from the data marriages, unresolved issues remain before the use of combined online/offline data is widely adopted by brands. "For example, as diverse data sets begin to be integrated, it will become painfully apparent what data can be integrated -- or not -- and specific tradeoffs will have to be made to move forward," he explained. "In particular, privacy policies of sites and ad networks will need to be revisited." The growing ability for marketers to target online ads using data gathered offline has generally raised concern among consumer privacy advocates. To that end, Fou suggested that brands are cautiously optimistic about hyper-targeting and slightly wary of public/consumer perception. "

Marriage of offline and online data sources to target advertising may make tracking more interesting for consumers and advertisers alike.

Prop 8 maps, a mashup of Google Maps and Prop 8 Donors, shows the names of those who contributed money to the passage of California's Proposition 8, which prohibits same-sex marriage. The mashup also shows the streets where these people live. This kind of mashup is useful, but to some, it's also intrusive and scary. While these contribution records are public record, the idea that your name and mapped street are online could be considered unnecessarily invasive. The mashup offers great information, but is the backlash and privacy invasion worth it? This particular mashup, while not on a news site, raises questions about when and how journalists should use this type of online application.

January 26, 2009 - As a presidential candidate, Barack Obama made his position on abortion very clear. During his campaign, he stated that he would sign the Freedom of Choice Act and that he opposed restrictions on Partial Birth Abortions. Now as President, Obama used the 36th anniversary of the Supreme Court's Roe v. Wade decision to reiterate his quite extreme position. Obama made several statements about "ensuring that our daughters have the same rights and opportunities as our sons...." However, his key statement appears to demonstrate an utter misunderstanding of the legal aspects of abortion, was that government "should not intrude on our most private family matters." An Associated Press subheader put it as "the ruling legalizing abortion represented a broader principle that government should not intrude on private family matters." Obama seemingly fails to understand three things about the "right to privacy." First, in that as far as it has been applied to abortion and contraception (Griswold vs. Connecticut); it is not a principle about "family matters." It is a principle purely about individual choice. Under Roe, no one else in the "family" has any say about the abortion decision. If the woman is not married to the father of the baby, he is not "family" anyway. Second, the right to privacy is not absolute. Third and most important, that under Roe, the "right to privacy" is secondary to two considerations about the unborn child: whether or not the unborn child is a "person," or at least "potential life." For these last two, we can turn to Roe itself. The "Right to Privacy" The majority opinion of Roe admits that, "The Constitution does explicitly mention any right of privacy." Majority author Harry Blackmun cites various past court decisions which recognize personal rights that are "fundamental" or "implicit in the concept of ordered liberty." Since these private rights had been found to have extension to areas such as marriage, procreation, contraception

There are plenty of rumors out in the cyberworld about the future of Twitter, a popular social networking site, and whether the company will be acquired or partner with another company. Some believe one of the suitors is Google Inc. Rumor has it, the two companies are considering collaborating on a Google real time search engine. To make it work, Google could pay cash, stock or a combination of both. Google wouldn't comment on these rumors. Nevertheless, it's an intriguing idea for a company created three years ago that has, to date, not made any money. Analysts think this would be a good marriage, according to MarketWatch. Gartner Inc. analyst Jeff Mann, for one, told the website it's a pretty good idea. "The culture and ambitions of Twitter and Google match." Not only that, there are lots of indications of growth. Twitter's content is now growing by 6 million tweets per day, and that's a win-win situation for Google, for sure.

On January 7, backers of California's Proposition 8 filed a federal lawsuit, asking that they be exempted from complying with California election laws that require disclosure of the names of people who give as much as $100 to a campaign for or against an initiative. The case is ProtectMarriage.com v Bowen, no. 2:09-cv-00058 (Sacramento). It was assigned to U.S. District Court Judge Morrison England, who was appointed in 2002. The case depends on the 1982 U.S. Supreme Court precedent Brown v Socialist Workers '74 Campaign Committee, which said that disclosure is not compelled if there is a reasonable possibility that campaign contributors, if identified, will be subject to harassment. Besides the Socialist Workers Party, other groups that have won freedom from disclosure include the Freedom Socialist Party, Socialist Action, and the Communist Party.