Spyware vs. adware: the controversy grows
Spyware or adware – depending on the circumstances under which it gets installed on the consumer’s browser, the ad-triggering software has been called both. Litigation pitting retailers against users of the software—including other retailers—self-policing by the industry and better web site and operating system security could work to help stamp out aspects of adware many find objectionable. But given that, the practice could be here to stay in some form, and consumers` attitudes hold the key.
Ad-triggering software that resides on a consumer’s browser is set to serve ads from network participants based on what the consumer views in that browser. “There are certainly practices more ethical than others when you’re dealing with contextual advertising,” says Lydia Leong, analyst with Gartner Dataquest. Ad-triggering software, she says, “needs to make it clear that it is not a goof-up on the part of Ford, for example, if it displays an ad on Ford for Chevrolet. It needs to be clearly labeled that it is a competitive offer that is being displayed by a piece of software the consumer has installed. It needs to be occasional, and non-intrusive.”
How does adware find its way onto browsers? It’s most often attached to other free applications a consumer might wish to download, such as the capacity to share music files. Disclosure of the fact that ad-triggering software is attached to the desired application is better in some cases than others. Some installs itself completely on the sly, like a virus, via security holes in operating systems. Some can actually interfere with the user’s experience, for instance, by reducing browser response times.
While it’s clear that brand retailers object to competing offers served on their own sites, the issue of what constitutes sufficient disclosure to consumers who download the ad-triggering application is a murkier one. Few would argue that software that installs itself completely below the consumer`s radar screen is anything but unethical. Larger contextual ad-serving networks such as Claria and WhenU say disclosure language and uninstall directions for their ad-triggering applications are clearly available to consumers.
But there’s still the matter of consumer perception. Consumers annoyed by the ads blame the site on which the ads are served, if they fail to understand they’ve downloaded the ad-triggering software on their own browsers themselves.
“These networks are saying consumers opt-in to them, but I call it acquiesce-in,” says Gary Stein, analyst with Jupiter Research Inc. “It’s not the same as when you go to Delta.com and sign up because you want them to tell you when they have supersaver fares. It’s more like, ‘I’ll take this because I really want Kazaa.’ You’re really looking for something else.”
L.L. Bean Inc. recently settled with Atkins Nutritionals Inc. and Gevalia Kaffe after suing them over their use of ad-triggering software to promote their own products on LLBean.com. "This is good news for L.L.Bean and countless consumers who are fed up with spyware-enabled advertising practices that invade personal computers and the privacy of their families. We can’t see why any reputable retailer would choose to litigate in defense of a practice that compromises consumer trust and confidence," says Mary Lou Kelley, L.L. Bean`s vice president of e-commerce. Two other retailers named in that suit are litigating the case.
Even so, plenty of advertisers including some big names in consumer package goods, travel and retail have found that adware delivers, according to Stein. “There are some problems with the execution of adware because it frustrates people,” he says. “Those issues are going to have to be sorted out. But in and of itself, it’s smart targeting; it’s behavioral targeting.”
Leong points out that a number of applications commonly used by consumers already have advertising formats embedded in them. For example, the free version of AOL Instant Messenger has a window that sometimes displays ad. “No one objects to that. What people object to is advertising that interferes with the way they work,” she says.
While Leong believes that the ad-triggering software in some form is a fixture, the ethical questions surrounding its execution are in for some hard questioning by the industry, she says. “Some will consider it an unethical business practice. Having it viewed as unethical may be sufficient to discourage it as an advertising technique,” she says. “If your customers perceive you as being unethical, does that hurt your sales more than you benefit from the advertising?”
Back...
