If no one is watching do ethical concerns & personal privacy really matter to global media planning?

The introduction of GDPR (ICO, 2021) was a turning point for marketers, setting a global standard for privacy and data management. However, if the regulators aren’t watching, and consumers aren’t asking questions, do ethical concerns and personal privacy really matter?

To understand this, we must first attempt to define privacy. Looking at privacy in a marketing context, Westin defines it as “a state of limited access to a consumer’s information.” (Westin, 1967) Nill and Aalberts (Nill and Aalberts, 2014) built on this, defining privacy as “related to control of the dissemination and use of consumer information including, but not limited to demographic, search history, and personal profile information.”

Consumers have long been concerned about privacy and are increasingly likely to take matters into their own hands, with one in ten internet users around the world using ad-blocking software to prevent companies from tracking online activity (Anant et al, 2020).

However, despite consumers being concerned, very few take adequate steps to protect their data (Anant et al, 2020). Many internet users don’t know “how to protect their privacy online, even though they were concerned” (Paine Schofield et al, 2007). This demonstrates why legislation is so important, as it protects those who aren’t digitally literate enough to protect themselves.

Figure 1: Consumer concerns over data collection and privacy are mounting, but few take adequate protective precautions. (Pew Research Centre, cited in Anant et al 2019)

Trust is often defined as “the extent to which a firm believes that its exchange partner is honest and/or benevolent.” (Deutsch, 1958;. Larzelere and Huston, 1980) and is a major factor to consider when discussing privacy and ethical concerns.

An example of this was in 2012 when Target used data mining to send personalised advertising to women who they suspected to be pregnant. However, they received complaints as consumers found it concerning that a company had predicted their pregnancy, often before they had announced it themselves. Target adjusted their strategy and began sending this personalised content amongst other offers, so it looked random. Soon after this was implemented, sales of mother and baby items began to increase (Duhigg, 2012). Andrew Pole, a statistician for Target, concluded that “as long as a pregnant woman thinks she hasn’t been spied on, she’ll use the coupons… As long as we don’t spook her, it works.” (Duhigg, 2012).

It is important to note that while this campaign didn’t breech any privacy regulations, there are ethical concerns around the use of data mining, most importantly if someone is not aware that the information is being collected or of how it will be used, they are not given the opportunity to consent or withhold consent for its collection and use (Van Wel and Royakkers, 2004).

Transparency about data collection policies is the first driver of trust in brands and could potentially impact willingness of consumers to share their data (WARC, 2020). Consumers are more likely to trust companies that react quickly to hacks and breaches or actively disclose them to the public (Anant et al, 2020). Those who have sound ethical and data policies, and show that their actions match their words, will be in a better position to attract consumers when they are looking to collect first-party data.

Figure 2: Consumers trust companies that limit the use of personal data and respond quickly to hacks and breaches (McKinsey 2017, cited in Anant et al 2019)

However, sometimes consumer trust is misplaced. Data shows that Amazon is the most trusted brand, as consumers view it as being secure, transparent and providing a benefit in return for data (WARC, 2020). However, Amazon has been criticised for not being vocal about major data breaches in 2018 (Boland, 2018) and 2020 when they formed part of the ‘nearly eight million UK online shopping transactions’ exposed on the web (Rudgard, 2020).

In a digital world, breaches will happen, and brands will be judged on how they deal with data breaches and ethical malpractice. In this instance, Amazon suffered few immediate consequences, but they have increased the risk of longer lasting reputational damage, which in time could lead to loss of consumer trust and therefore profitability.

Many have called for GDPR legislation reform, favouring a more centralised enforcement approach to truly protect consumer’s privacy, and hold those who don’t to account (Manancourt, 2021). For this to be truly effective, more needs to be done to educate consumers on their privacy rights, and how they can protect their privacy online as 38% of consumers use news and media sites to learn how to protect their personal information. This is a concern when news and media sites are ranked lowest in terms of trustworthiness (Entrust, 2021).

These steps will not only be beneficial for the protection of consumers but also for brands, as they begin to compete for first-party data. Therefore, I believe that ethical concerns and personal privacy not only matter but are crucial to success of global media planning.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

List of Figures:

Figure 1. ANANT, Venky, Lisa DONCHAK, James KAPLAN and Henning SOLLER. 2020. ‘The consumer-data opportunity and the privacy imperative’. McKinsey & Company [online]. Available at: https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/risk-and-resilience/our-insights/the-consumer-data-opportunity-and-the-privacy-imperative [accessed July 13th 2021].

Figure 2. ANANT, Venky, Lisa DONCHAK, James KAPLAN and Henning SOLLER. 2020. ‘The consumer-data opportunity and the privacy imperative’. McKinsey & Company [online]. Available at: https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/risk-and-resilience/our-insights/the-consumer-data-opportunity-and-the-privacy-imperative [accessed July 13th 2021].

References:

ANANT, Venky, Lisa DONCHAK, James KAPLAN and Henning SOLLER. 2020. ‘The consumer-data opportunity and the privacy imperative’. McKinsey & Company [online]. Available at: https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/risk-and-resilience/our-insights/the-consumer-data-opportunity-and-the-privacy-imperative [accessed July 13th 2021].

BOLAND, Hannah. 2018. ‘Amazon data breach reveals private details of customers ahead of Black Friday’. The Telegraph 21 November [online]. Available at: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2018/11/21/amazon-hit-data-breach-midst-key-sales-period [accessed July 14th 2021].

DEUTSCH, Morton. 1958. ‘Trust and suspicion.’ Journal of Conflict Resolution, 2(4), 265-279.

DUHIGG, Charles. 2012. ‘How Companies Learn Your Secrets’. The New York Times Magazine 16 February [online]. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/19/magazine/shopping-habits.html [accessed July 12th 2021]

ENTRUST. (2021). ‘Data from Entrust Reveals Contradictions in Consumer Sentiment Toward Data Privacy and Security’. ENTRUST. [online]. Available at: https://www.entrust.com/newsroom/press-releases/2021/data-from-entrust-reveals-contradictions-in-consumer-sentiment-toward-data-privacy-and-security [accessed July 17th 2021].

ICO. (2021). ‘Guide to the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR)’. ICO. [online]. Available at: https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr [accessed July 12th 2021].

LARZELERE, Robert E. and Ted L. HUSTON. 1980. ‘The Dyadic Trust Scale: Toward Understanding Interpersonal Trust in Close Relationships.’ Journal of Marriage and Family, 42(3), 595–604.

MANANCOURT, Vincent. 2021. ‘EU privacy law’s chief architect calls for its overhaul’. Politico 25 May [online]. Available at: https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-privacy-laws-chief-architect-calls-for-its-overhaul [accessed July 14th 2021].

NILL, Alexander and Robert J AALBERTS. 2014. ‘Legal and ethical challenges of online behavioral targeting in advertising.’ Journal of Current Issues and Research in Advertising, 35(2), 126–146.

PAINE SCHOFIELD, C.B., U.D REIPS, S. STIEGER, A.N. JOINSON and T. BUCHANAN. 2007. ‘Internet users' perceptions of 'privacy concerns' and 'privacy actions'. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 65(6), 526-536.

RUDGARD, Olivia. 2020. ‘Leak of millions of Amazon and eBay transactions exposes customer addresses’. The Telegraph 10 March [online]. Available at: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2020/03/10/leak-millions-amazon-ebay-transactions-exposes-customer-addresses/ [accessed July 14th 2021].

VAN WEL, Lita and Lambèr ROYAKKERS. 2004. ‘Ethical issues in web data mining.’ Ethics and Information Technology, 6(2), 129-140.

WARC. (2020). ‘What we know about data protection and privacy’. [online]. Available at: https://www-warc-com.ezproxy.falmouth.ac.uk/content/article/bestprac/what-we-know-about-data-protection-and-privacy/111995 [accessed July 12th 2021]

WESTIN, A. 1967. Privacy and freedom. New York: Antheneum.

Bibliography:

BERKMAN, A Bernard. 1971. ‘The Assault on Privacy: Computers, Data Banks, and Dossiers, by Arthur R. Miller’. Case Western Reserve Law Review, 22(4), 808-818.

BRODHERSON, Marc, Adam BROITMAN, Jason CHEROK and Kelsey ROBINSON. 2021. ‘A customer-centric approach to marketing in a privacy-first world’. McKinsey & Company [online]. Available at: https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/marketing-and-sales/our-insights/a-customer-centric-approach-to-marketing-in-a-privacy-first-world [accessed July 12th 2021].

GEYSKENS, Inge, Jan-Benedict E.M STEENKAMP and Nirmalya KUMAR. 1998. ‘Generalizations about trust in marketing channel relationships using meta-analysis.’ International Journal of Research in Marketing, 15(3), 223-248.

SOLOVE, D. J. 2008. Understanding privacy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.