Control!

Part 1: A series on managing consumer data consent in the age of regulation.

Even when it comes to data, the universal law of giving and receiving is true.

Janet Jackson told us back in 1986 about control. Eventually, agency must be afforded those we wish to control, or we risk losing them completely, precisely because we tried to maintain control over them. In other words, to truly have something it must be given away. Rarely do people follow this simple rule.

After opining in the verse, on how her parents told her what to do and molded her into what they wanted her to be, Janet sings poignant lyrics in the chorus that define this epic jam – and life.

Control – Now I’ve got a lot
Control – To get what I want
Control – I’m never gonna stop
Control – Now I’m all grown up

Janet Jackson, Control

The marketing and advertising data ecosystem is much like that child, now grown up and ready to take control. After years of getting away with using data in a clandestine fashion, advertisers and marketers must grow up and take control by giving some control away. To keep the system in tact it is necessary for marketers to change the relationship with the consumer, much like a parent must change their relationship to their child once they grow up – moving from parent to (hopefully) friend.

Thus, an ecosystem was created that wrested control from the consumer before they even knew what was happening!

In a twisted turn of events, the younger entity – advertising/marketing technology (MadTech) companies – play the role of the parent in this analogy. By dictating the terms on how data is stored, transferred and collected to the traditional marketers and advertisers, they have essentially been the mother and father telling the child to do what they’re told while molding the industry their own way. This has backfired spectacularly.

MadTech isn’t in the game for reciprocity or open and honest communication with the marketers’ and advertisers’ consumers. It is about personalization, scale and, exits. Thus, an ecosystem was created that wrested control from the consumer before they even knew what was happening! The use of technologies like cross-site tracking with cookies, location tracking, fingerprinting, and audio interpretation all happened with the consumer totally unaware. Because of this, consumers fear these technologies, since they don’t know what they do; how they work; what specific data of theirs is used; or how to limit the sharing of data they don’t want to provide.

Even with state-imposed regulations like Europe’s General Data Privacy Regulation (GDPR) and California’s California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) — and self-imposed regulations like Apple’s Internet Tracking Prevention (among others) — there is still minimal trust between consumer and marketer on this front. And you can blame the fact that data companies never gave the option for consent or control.

Recently, governments have fined big data companies and are now even going after them for antitrust violations. The most recent US antitrust suit is largely performative, given the provisions cited, but of note regardless. Of course, Consent Economy has called for antirust regulations as well. Still, with all this (and more) change happening in the industry — even as regulations mount and fines stiffen — MadTech is looking for a universal ID that will replace the mechanism, rather than shift the paradigm of the old model.

As more and more people become aware that there is an entire multi-billion dollar industry that has developed tools to extract, synchronize, transport, and utilize their data across sites and platforms, the time is now to offer consent solutions.

This is ridiculous.

Universal ID is not inherently bad, per say, but data usage is still opaque to consumers, who also can’t control who can access said data. However, rather than communicating and giving control to the consumer, marketers are literally trying to take the old model (Web Cookies and Mobile Advertising ID’s) and apply it to a new technology (Universal ID). As more and more people become aware that there is an entire multi-billion dollar industry that has developed tools to extract, synchronize, transport, and utilize their data across sites and platforms the time is now to offer consent solutions. We need trust built in to the system by giving control so we can maintain control.

Enter the Consent Management Platform (CMP)

CMP’s have been around for a while. They’ve been en vogue in Europe for the past four years or so, because of GDPR. They’re less so in the US and other countries that haven’t been beset with as much regulation. Regardless, a CMP will allow a Publisher to implement a custom strategy for how they’ll interact with site visitors; how they’ll store their data; what options they’ll offer consumers for data control; and what data they’ll provide to their partners in the value chain.

Yes, the Publisher will rule again. Content creators get ready, for your time is coming. Your visitor data will become more and more valuable. Site visitor data, that marketers have gotten permission to use for marketing purposes, is like gold. Site visitor data, that marketers have gotten consent to use for marketing purposes and share with partners, is like Lithium to an Electric Vehicle (EV).

Coming next

Part 2: A series on managing consumer data consent in the age of regulation.

Why publishers should be staffing up to take advantage of this opportunity to obtain consent. What is the content creators’ role versus the e-commerce site, versus the user generated content site? If consumers understand the needs of these entities, it will become much more clear why they want consumer data and make it a bit less scary.

Also, publishers require upskilling to conduct a value-exchanged based model of data consent and usage. Why should they be incentivized to give up control, and how site creators gain more control in this model of transparency.