Verizon Wireless sells out customers with creepy new tactic

[n2doc]

As far as corporate notices go, they don't get much creepier than this recent alert from Verizon Wireless.

The company says it's "enhancing" its Relevant Mobile Advertising program, which it uses to collect data on customers' online habits so that marketers can pitch stuff at them with greater precision.

"In addition to the customer information that's currently part of the program, we will soon use an anonymous, unique identifier we create when you register on our websites," Verizon Wireless is telling customers.

"This identifier may allow an advertiser to use information they have about your visits to websites from your desktop computer to deliver marketing messages to mobile devices on our network," it says.

That means exactly what it looks like: Verizon will monitor not just your wireless activities but also what you do on your wired or Wi-Fi-connected laptop or desktop computer — even if your computer doesn't have a Verizon connection.

The company will then share that additional data with marketers.


http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-lazarus-20140425,0,2539606.column

[dixiegrrrrl]

1. Help me out..I am confused.

How can Verizon track my movements on my computer if I am not connected to verison?



and 2nd question, since I don't have a mobile phone..
why are people putting up with advertisements on their mobiles?
Are they being charged for each one?

[Lizzie Poppet]

2. Some answers:

What they're tracking on your computer isn't your movements, but your browsing history, via a "cookie" (a little code snippet that's placed when you visit, unless you have them blocked in your browser settings). This will only happen, as mentioned above, when you register on one of their websites (the registration terms of service will include accepting the cookie).

Advertisements on mobiles (smartphones, anyway) happen when you use them to visit websites. You aren't charged anything for them (aside from whatever fees you're paying for the phone service anyway).

[dixiegrrrrl]

3. I have cookies blocked

for most browsing
I just figured that eveyone did, as a matter of common sense.

[Lizzie Poppet]

4. For some time now, about 25% of users block cookies.

The first research I know of into that is from 2005, and the percentage since then hasn't changed much at all.

[dixiegrrrrl]

5. Really? that few?

So about 75% of users are happy sitting ducks for advertisers and other nefarious snoopers.
sheesh.

[Lizzie Poppet]

6. Thing is, cookies provide a lot of positives, too.

If you shop online, they're indispensable (unless you like logging back in every time you go from one page to another or possibly not even being able to check out at all). Sites like Amazon that offer personalization and whose suggestions are often pretty darn spot-on couldn't do any of that without them. Some sites can remember that a user prefers a larger font size, or news articles of a certain type...and that requires a way to know who you are and keep track of those preferences.

Cookies enable analytics, without which people who develop stuff for the web would know far, far less about what people actually use online. Without this information, they'd have a lot harder time figuring out what people want them to build.

In the area of online advertising, you're going to get ads, regardless. Personally, I prefer those ads to be targeted, to have at least some chance of being something I'm actually interested in. Ignoring targeted ads when I'm not actually wanting to shop or research products isn't any harder than ignoring non-targeted ones.

But yes, there are indeed security issues. Cookies by their very nature contain at least some personal information. Cookie security is a very big deal in the industry (and the subject of regulation in the EU and other regions).