12 ms·

Facebook Will Cut Off Access to Third Party Data for Ad Targeting

185 points by cctt23 9y ago

marcinzm 9y ago
I wonder if this just means they know so much about people from first-party data they've collected (including their share buttons on other sites) that the additional performance gains from third-party data weren't worth much.
- ryanwaggoner 9y ago
  Maybe they used the partner data as ML training data and now they don't need it anymore :)
  - hardtke 9y ago
    That would likely be a violation of the contracts signed with the data aggregation companies.
  - paulie_a 9y ago
    Maybe they will be slightly better than the emails in my spam folder For the amount of data Facebook collects, the quality of advertising they provide is pretty much garbage. Late night tv infomercial quality.
- davemel37 9y ago
  THIS! Plus, the pixels ability to learn and adapt and custom audiences... tells them much more than some stale expensive data can.
oh-kumudo 9y ago
I think this is a welcome gesture, someone has to draw the line. Data shouldn't be a bargain.
troydavis 9y ago
LinkedIn offers a similar product, which they call "Contact Targeting" with data integration. From https://www.linkedin.com/help/linkedin/answer/85809?lang=en https://www.linkedin.com/help/linkedin/answer/85809?lang=en: > Contact targeting is a LinkedIn Marketing Solutions feature that allows advertisers to upload lists of contacts to include as part of their target audience for ad campaigns. If you have already interacted with a company and provided them with your contact information (e.g. to sign-up for a newsletter or webinar), they may include you in a target audience for a LinkedIn ad campaign using contact targeting. It's part of "Matched Audiences": https://www.linkedin.com/help/linkedin/answer/81195 https://www.linkedin.com/help/linkedin/answer/81195 Twitter's rough equivalent is called "Tailored Audiences," though as far as I know, it relies only on hashed email addresses and device IDs uploaded directly by the advertiser, not data appending companies: https://developer.twitter.com/en/docs/ads/audiences/overview https://developer.twitter.com/en/docs/ads/audiences/overview TechCrunch doesn't say exactly what part of Facebook's product will be rolled back - uploading any hashed user lists? hashed user targeting only when done by third-party data appenders? only when based on offline events? - so it's hard to tell how far Facebook is going.
- ikeboy 9y ago
  Facebook is still keeping this. If the advertiser provides your info to Facebook they can target you. They are getting rid of the ability to target you based on data Facebook purchases from third parties - e.g. you buy something in a Sephora store, Facebook buys transaction info from your bank/visa/"brokers" and then tags you as "bought beauty in last 30 days", then a brand targets that tag and you see an ad you wouldn't have seen otherwise. And yes, there's a specific Facebook targeting category for "bought beauty last 30 days", or was before this change.
  - troydavis 9y ago
    Thanks. I just updated my comment to make it clear that TechCrunch doesn't say exactly what part is being removed. If you're correct, the part they're rolling back is relatively small.
    - 9y ago
partycoder 9y ago
Facebook policies are very sneaky. Rather than defaulting them to something restrictive, their defaults are very permissive. I would not be surprised if this thing is undone later.
mtgx 9y ago
You know how Facebook keeps saying "we never sell your data"? It was bartering it with data brokers all this time. The only reason they're even taking this step is because they know there are many other companies that could get just as much if not more data about its users as Cambridge Analytica did from the data brokers that partnered with Facebook. This would be true especially now that the "cat is out of the bag" so potentially many other malicious groups/rival states could be trying to do the same thing as CA did. Facebook simply saw the inevitable: Cambridge Analytica multiplied by 100 in its future. But one question remains: has Facebook made sure that the data brokers deleted all of the FB data, and did they just ask them to "certify" this, as they did with CA in 2015, or did FB audit these companies? (as Zuckerberg committed to do recently with all the companies they suspect of abusing its policies?) Did FB audit Palantir, too, and its use of Cambridge Analytica's data? https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/27/palantir-worked-with-cambridge-analytica-on-the-facebook-data-whistleblower.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/27/palantir-worked-with-cambrid...
- kolmogorov 9y ago
  they did not sell data to brokers. they bought data from brokers.
shafyy 9y ago
Not sure what this really means, but it's impressive how many measures FB is publicly taking that seem to improve the privacy of users. Again, not sure if it really does, but it sure makes it seem like it does. Great tactical game by Facebook.
- domevent 9y ago
  It feels a lot more like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic to me.
adamiscool8 9y ago
What are the odds they've already managed to extract and associate all the Partner Categories data for their own use?
rednerrus 9y ago
The ads on Instagram are pretty amazing. I find myself wanting to buy 80% of the products they try to sell me.
- quadrangle 9y ago
  Get an adblocker
  - bpicolo 9y ago
    Most instagram usage is mobile, where you don't get that flexibility (especially on iOS)
    - quadrangle 9y ago
      This fact is at the heart of what is wrong with non-FLO software and the whole trend of technology today. I left Apple (previously only a Mac user) several years ago over this. It's not merely the issue of ads (which is not to be understated, ads are ruinous, at the heart of tons of problems). The way power structures work in these non-FLO walled-gardens amount to an effective sabotage of the entire potential for FLO software overall.
clay_the_ripper 9y ago
I might catch some flak for saying this, but as a marketer this is a pretty significant change and will make running campaigns more difficult. Also, I don’t really see how this does much to protect anyone’s privacy, this mostly just makes running effective campaigns more complicated and expensive. The data is still being collected and sold, now you can’t just get it directly through Facebook anymore.
- riazrizvi 9y ago
  I don't think it is intended to protect users' privacy, indeed it seems to me that it is against Facebook's interest to protect user privacy from advertisers - the platform is primarily valuable to marketers because of the user data that is available to them. I think by shutting down the marketplace for 3rd party data, Facebook is allowing it to continue elsewhere but also washing their hands a bit, so next time they will have better optics when explaining themselves to regulators if data misuse hits the headlines again.
- davemel37 9y ago
  I think the pixel and first party data is where the real results come from...the third party data was probably on the chopping block long before this CA story... It will make some marketers feel less in control...but i actually doubt that data actually warranted the additional costs facebook charged for using it.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- jacquesm 9y ago
  > I might catch some flak for saying this, but as a marketer this is a pretty significant change and will make running campaigns more difficult. Excellent. > Also, I don’t really see how this does much to protect anyone’s privacy, this mostly just makes running effective campaigns more complicated and expensive. If you don't have access to data you shouldn't have access to that improves privacy. Exchanges leaking data which then gets cached is a huge privacy issue, allowing third parties to link up this data with data they already have is absolutely terrible. Data files in isolation are bad enough, allowing the joining of disjoint datasets is about as bad as it gets when it comes do de-anonymizing people. > The data is still being collected and sold, now you can’t just get it directly through Facebook anymore. Good. Not all data will still be available, and hopefully some more of these holes will be closed soon to make it even harder to make running highly targeted campaigns more difficult. From where I'm sitting the sooner marketeers lose the capability to run targeted campaigns the better, and every little bit helps. On the plus side: your budgets will go up to reach the same effect so why complain?
davemel37 9y ago
This will actually make facebook ads cheaper...many people dont realize that facebook charges you a markup for some of these targeting audiences.
jedwhite 9y ago
I believe this is related to GDPR, which isn't clear in the article. This is the information from Facebook (via Dennis Yu from Blitz Metrics): // from Facebook: Although I have spoken with many of you just today and yesterday, I wanted to make you immediately aware of an update we received to third-party targeting, late this afternoon. We have a responsibility for the use of data on our platform - and we want to ensure that people have transparency and control over how their information is used. Over the past week, we announced important changes to reduce the amount of data that apps can request from users and ensure that people have more control over their information on Facebook. Now, to build on these efforts, we are going to be more restrictive in the way that we use data for advertising on our platform, particularly as it relates to information from third-party data providers. Specifically, over the next six months, we will remove the ability to use Partner Categories, a targeting solution that enables third-party data providers to offer their targeting directly on Facebook. While leveraging third-party data is a common industry practice and we've put good protections in place, we believe this step will help improve people's privacy on Facebook. We understand this may impact your advertising efforts on our platform, and we will work with you through this transition. In an attempt to minimize disruption, we will allow time for you to update your targeting. In light of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the European Union, we have created a timeline to comply with the regulation: · May 10: After this date, you will no longer be able to create or edit campaign using Partner Categories built on audiences from the UK, Germany, and France; however, they will be allowed to continue running until May 24. · May 25: We will no longer deliver to Partner Categories built on audiences from the UK, Germany, and France, and these targeting options will no longer be available for use on our platform. You will notified to update any targeting containing impacted Partner Categories before this date. · June 30: Last day for creating new or editing existing campaigns using non-EU Partner Categories; they will be allowed to run until September 30. · October 1: All other Partner Categories will no longer be available as targeting options on our platform and we will stop delivering against these audiences. You will be notified to update your targeting by this date. Protecting people’s information is the most important thing we do. You can expect to hear more from us in the coming weeks as we continue to work to make our platform safer.
- jacquesm 9y ago
oh_sigh 9y ago
I believe there is a saying about horses and gates which would be apposite.
rqs 9y ago
Well, as a Dumb fuck[0], I completely believe in Facebook will take all the necessary steps to protect my privacy. [0] https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mark_Zuckerberg https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mark_Zuckerberg And of course you can down vote, but we will meet again in the next Facebook scandal :)
gaius 9y ago
But Facebook themselves still gather and keep the data? If so this is mere window dressing
dschuetz 9y ago
It's a step in the right direction, but still I don't trust Facebook making a decision like that. In the end they'll just replace it with something else which might turn out even worse than before. You cannot make money selling user data by cutting off data channels to your third party customer base. So, I'm waiting. Off Facebook.
nitwit005 9y ago
I would assume the issue was that they had to give these companies data in order to match up a facebook user with an ID in the third party systems. See, for example, BlueKai's integration documentation: https://docs.oracle.com/en/cloud/saas/data-cloud/dsmkt/integrating-oracle-bluekai-platform.html https://docs.oracle.com/en/cloud/saas/data-cloud/dsmkt/integ...
SeriousM 9y ago
Pfff, so? These companies have the data already, and if not, they have long 6 months to get them. This only tells me that Facebook is trying to act as we wish to yet acting as it always did.
jamescyber 9y ago
After Facebook now Namo App user data is not safe — Big privacy Concern After the viral exposure of loopholes in the Aadhaar security system in January’17 now it’s all about the Namo app it is being claimed that the application shares private information of its users with third party companies without their consent. Read it : https://www.ica.in/newsroom/namo-app-sharing-user-data https://www.ica.in/newsroom/namo-app-sharing-user-data
kristianc 9y ago
This is a fairly major change, and will have some fairly significant impacts on the AdTech industry. I'd go as far as saying this was the first really meaningful fallout from the CA scandal. I'd hazard a guess that not many ordinary users are even aware that retailers can upload their email addresses into Facebook and create targeting segments from them. As to what these changes do to the AdTech industry is anyone's guess. 'Onboarding' email addresses is basically LiveRamp's business model.
- davemel37 9y ago
  I highly doubt this had anything to do with CA, outside of some PR timing... third party data is stale and expensive and advertisers were already complaining of costs on FB... this will make it cheaper for mom and pop advertisers and scare away the affiliate marketers mostly.. facebooks owm data and first party audience data is still open season and where the ad dollar shift has been happening anyways... This was a smart biz decision and CA was just a convenient opportunity to roll out without too much backlash IMHO.
- Uw7yTcf36gTc 9y ago
  that's not what is being removed. It's 3rd party data that FB is purchasing not, that advertisers are providing through Custom Audiences for Lookalikes.
davemel37 9y ago
Honestly, I think this is a fallout of third party data being too expensive relative to the increase in performance more than anything else... middleware ad tech and data sellers are a failed experiment that has been a net negative for advertisers, users and publishers..all it did was just enrich some bloated ad tech startups to steal a piece of the pie...its a scam that floated on smoke and mirror attribution models...and advertisers who actually control their budgets have smartened up finally...its artificially propped up by agencies incentivized to spend more and make their clients look good in a powerpoint and colorful excel sheet...without true accountability to REALITY! I think we will see many more hits to the third party data world and ad tech that promises richer targeting without really serving the users or advertisers by enabling them to deliver better value...versus just paying twice for customers they would have anyways short of the third party selling your customers to your competitors...its a shell game and its finally coming crashing down!!! GOOD RIDDANCE!
davemel37 9y ago
One possible conspiracy... Facebook stock has dropped a bunch, site usage is down 24% and advertisers are leaving left and right... anounce these audience segments will be gone in 6 months but advertisers can A, reach them now and B, build first party audiences off this data by advertising to specific segments just to cookie folks... and the next two earnings calls show a big increase in ad spend!
vgy7ujm 9y ago
Zuck has to go.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
gcatalfamo 9y ago
Thanks to functional analphabets (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_illiteracy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_illiteracy) the advertising world is becoming much less interesting.
chatmasta 9y ago
So does the mean you can no longer import a list of emails / Facebook IDs for lookalike audience creation?
baxtr 9y ago
Facebook is to me a clear case, where missing company values created a huge mess. What are the core values/core beliefs of Facebook? I firmly believe that other than anything else a set of core values determines the long term fate of companies. Of course, it’s not enough to merely have a set of beliefs that you’ve put up nicely on the wall, but, rather, top management must speak and act according to these principles.
- kushti 9y ago
  The very core principle of any public corporation is to show positive metrics to its shareholders during board meetings.
  - baxtr 9y ago
    That is a goal, not a principle to operate by. An no, this is not just semantics.
- gt_ 9y ago
  If you mean Facebook the tech firm, stop kidding yourself. It’s a for-profit enterprise, not a hero’s journey.
- wu-ikkyu 9y ago
  If you look at how Facebook was founded it's clear core values and ethics were not a priority from the beginning.
chicob 9y ago
I still don't see anyone addressing the elephant in the room: corporate, extensive personal data harvesting must stop. If this is Facebook's business model, Facebook must go. No one would allow the kind of pervasive intrusion put in practice by Facebook (and others) by the part of governing bodies, the police or the military. So why are we still allowing marketing companies to do it? Why are willing to let credit, insurance and health companies access our data in order to know us better than ourselves? When is this the price of a "better user experience"? It is disingenuous to say that people simply "agreed to this". No one can expect the average user to fully comprehend the inner workings of the modern web, and to what extent their data is being used, or even to keep up with changing terms of use for every single service. Some, like Tim Cook, are starting to address the issue but not as directly as one would expect.
- matte_black 9y ago
  If a credit company doesn't know who you are they will not loan you even one dollar. If an insurance company doesn't know who you are they will charge you the maximum to account for the risk. If a health company doesn't know your data they can't accurately diagnose trends in your health. Still want to play this game?
  - jacquesm 9y ago
    If a credit card company or health company relies on a social media entity to decide whether to give you credit or to be able to accurately diagnose your health then they have other problems. None of that needs Facebook. Still want to play this game? Credit card companies were extending people credit and doctors were making accurate diagnoses long before the internet came along, they are definitely not a necessity for the functioning of society in ways that really matter.
    - matte_black 9y ago
      Can you say that with any certainty? You don't know what you can do with data really until you have it all available at your disposal.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
bogomipz 9y ago
I think the last paragraph is the most important one: >"Facebook clarified that it will still work with companies like Experian and Acxiom in order to measure ad performance and provide metrics, although it will also be conducting a review of those ongoing relationships." These FB announcements the last couple of days seem little more than grooming for possible upcoming appearances in front of legislators. They can point to this and the surface-level app redesign and say they've "already" taken efforts to shore up concerns. I think most people have no idea that FB and Experian - a consumer credit reporting agency have been sharing data at all. Where was that explained in the app redesign that was trotted out yesterday? It's worth reading how Acxion who facing similar pressures recently handled their own superficial offering of "transparency": https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/05/technology/acxiom-lets-consumers-see-data-it-collects.html https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/05/technology/acxiom-lets-co...
- philipodonnell 9y ago
  I would really like to know what data they are sharing with Experian. If its just helping them target ads then they should explain why Experian is allowed to continue, but I am more concerned with Experian being "creative" with Facebook's tools and incorporating some of that into their credit scoring models.
  - mbrumlow 9y ago
    I am guessing it is something even worse. Like, Experian uses Facebook data to adjust credit scores. And some time in the near future your credit score will suck if you don't have a social media footprint.
    - nohat 9y ago
      A social media footprint on Facebook in particular, conveniently enough.
    - Spivak 9y ago
      Sure, but people already go to extreme lengths to groom their credit histories, at least this method doesn't require spending money. Just as an example, I have a friend who has an account that's older than her that her parents made for the sole purpose of bumping her score. Pulling data from more sources doesn't change the underlying problem of faceless businesses assigning people scores based on vague unknown requirements.
imcqueen 9y ago
I know it's been tried many times unsuccessfully, but with the benefit of hindsight now would you have preferred to pay a nominal annual fee for the handful of currently free services that you really like? I realize we're likely too far gone now, but it's fundamentally an issue that we aren't paying for these ad-supported services, so the companies gravitate toward serving the interests of the entities that are paying them. That's not a justification or reflection of my opinion about privacy and ethics around the use of data, just a thought around removing the problem from the equation all together. I guess my real question is, if you remove the profit seeking component of the data discussion does the bad behavior completely go away? Definitely interested in other opinions.
avoidit 9y ago
Before I went to read the article, I wondered if they would define first and second party here. And they do: Quote from the article: "In order to leverage the deep pool of data Facebook collects on users, the company mixes information that it obtains from users themselves (Pages a user liked, for instance) with information from advertisers (membership status in a loyalty program, for example) and with data obtained from third party providers." It is super interesting that they have no terminology at all for data collected via shadow profiles. I propose "zeroth party" data - they are shadow profiles after all. :-)
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
slowandlow 9y ago
This won't stop the regulations coming their way. Facebook had the chance to prove they could be trusted but squandered it and may have ruined it for the tech industry. They know this and it's why they hired Washington lobbyists.
supercarsw 9y ago
Why I have a feeling that we gonna have now news.. "Oh, we are doing all this only to help you better". Thats why we collect your sms, locations and phonecalls data.
supercarsw 9y ago
the sell data on bonkers!

185 points by cctt23 9y ago

I wonder if this just means they know so much about people from first-party data they've collected (including their share buttons on other sites) that the additional performance gains from third-party data weren't worth much.

ryanwaggoner 9y ago
Maybe they used the partner data as ML training data and now they don't need it anymore :)
- hardtke 9y ago
  That would likely be a violation of the contracts signed with the data aggregation companies.
- paulie_a 9y ago
  Maybe they will be slightly better than the emails in my spam folder For the amount of data Facebook collects, the quality of advertising they provide is pretty much garbage. Late night tv infomercial quality.
davemel37 9y ago
THIS! Plus, the pixels ability to learn and adapt and custom audiences... tells them much more than some stale expensive data can.

oh-kumudo 9y ago

I think this is a welcome gesture, someone has to draw the line. Data shouldn't be a bargain.

troydavis 9y ago

LinkedIn offers a similar product, which they call "Contact Targeting" with data integration. From https://www.linkedin.com/help/linkedin/answer/85809?lang=en https://www.linkedin.com/help/linkedin/answer/85809?lang=en: > Contact targeting is a LinkedIn Marketing Solutions feature that allows advertisers to upload lists of contacts to include as part of their target audience for ad campaigns. If you have already interacted with a company and provided them with your contact information (e.g. to sign-up for a newsletter or webinar), they may include you in a target audience for a LinkedIn ad campaign using contact targeting. It's part of "Matched Audiences": https://www.linkedin.com/help/linkedin/answer/81195 https://www.linkedin.com/help/linkedin/answer/81195 Twitter's rough equivalent is called "Tailored Audiences," though as far as I know, it relies only on hashed email addresses and device IDs uploaded directly by the advertiser, not data appending companies: https://developer.twitter.com/en/docs/ads/audiences/overview https://developer.twitter.com/en/docs/ads/audiences/overview TechCrunch doesn't say exactly what part of Facebook's product will be rolled back - uploading any hashed user lists? hashed user targeting only when done by third-party data appenders? only when based on offline events? - so it's hard to tell how far Facebook is going.

ikeboy 9y ago
Facebook is still keeping this. If the advertiser provides your info to Facebook they can target you. They are getting rid of the ability to target you based on data Facebook purchases from third parties - e.g. you buy something in a Sephora store, Facebook buys transaction info from your bank/visa/"brokers" and then tags you as "bought beauty in last 30 days", then a brand targets that tag and you see an ad you wouldn't have seen otherwise. And yes, there's a specific Facebook targeting category for "bought beauty last 30 days", or was before this change.
- troydavis 9y ago
  Thanks. I just updated my comment to make it clear that TechCrunch doesn't say exactly what part is being removed. If you're correct, the part they're rolling back is relatively small.
  - 9y ago

partycoder 9y ago

Facebook policies are very sneaky. Rather than defaulting them to something restrictive, their defaults are very permissive. I would not be surprised if this thing is undone later.

mtgx 9y ago

You know how Facebook keeps saying "we never sell your data"? It was bartering it with data brokers all this time. The only reason they're even taking this step is because they know there are many other companies that could get just as much if not more data about its users as Cambridge Analytica did from the data brokers that partnered with Facebook. This would be true especially now that the "cat is out of the bag" so potentially many other malicious groups/rival states could be trying to do the same thing as CA did. Facebook simply saw the inevitable: Cambridge Analytica multiplied by 100 in its future. But one question remains: has Facebook made sure that the data brokers deleted all of the FB data, and did they just ask them to "certify" this, as they did with CA in 2015, or did FB audit these companies? (as Zuckerberg committed to do recently with all the companies they suspect of abusing its policies?) Did FB audit Palantir, too, and its use of Cambridge Analytica's data? https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/27/palantir-worked-with-cambridge-analytica-on-the-facebook-data-whistleblower.html https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/27/palantir-worked-with-cambrid...

kolmogorov 9y ago
they did not sell data to brokers. they bought data from brokers.

shafyy 9y ago

Not sure what this really means, but it's impressive how many measures FB is publicly taking that seem to improve the privacy of users. Again, not sure if it really does, but it sure makes it seem like it does. Great tactical game by Facebook.

domevent 9y ago
It feels a lot more like rearranging deck chairs on the Titanic to me.

adamiscool8 9y ago

What are the odds they've already managed to extract and associate all the Partner Categories data for their own use?

rednerrus 9y ago

The ads on Instagram are pretty amazing. I find myself wanting to buy 80% of the products they try to sell me.

quadrangle 9y ago
Get an adblocker
- bpicolo 9y ago
  Most instagram usage is mobile, where you don't get that flexibility (especially on iOS)
  - quadrangle 9y ago
    This fact is at the heart of what is wrong with non-FLO software and the whole trend of technology today. I left Apple (previously only a Mac user) several years ago over this. It's not merely the issue of ads (which is not to be understated, ads are ruinous, at the heart of tons of problems). The way power structures work in these non-FLO walled-gardens amount to an effective sabotage of the entire potential for FLO software overall.

clay_the_ripper 9y ago

I might catch some flak for saying this, but as a marketer this is a pretty significant change and will make running campaigns more difficult. Also, I don’t really see how this does much to protect anyone’s privacy, this mostly just makes running effective campaigns more complicated and expensive. The data is still being collected and sold, now you can’t just get it directly through Facebook anymore.

riazrizvi 9y ago
I don't think it is intended to protect users' privacy, indeed it seems to me that it is against Facebook's interest to protect user privacy from advertisers - the platform is primarily valuable to marketers because of the user data that is available to them. I think by shutting down the marketplace for 3rd party data, Facebook is allowing it to continue elsewhere but also washing their hands a bit, so next time they will have better optics when explaining themselves to regulators if data misuse hits the headlines again.
davemel37 9y ago
I think the pixel and first party data is where the real results come from...the third party data was probably on the chopping block long before this CA story... It will make some marketers feel less in control...but i actually doubt that data actually warranted the additional costs facebook charged for using it.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
jacquesm 9y ago
> I might catch some flak for saying this, but as a marketer this is a pretty significant change and will make running campaigns more difficult. Excellent. > Also, I don’t really see how this does much to protect anyone’s privacy, this mostly just makes running effective campaigns more complicated and expensive. If you don't have access to data you shouldn't have access to that improves privacy. Exchanges leaking data which then gets cached is a huge privacy issue, allowing third parties to link up this data with data they already have is absolutely terrible. Data files in isolation are bad enough, allowing the joining of disjoint datasets is about as bad as it gets when it comes do de-anonymizing people. > The data is still being collected and sold, now you can’t just get it directly through Facebook anymore. Good. Not all data will still be available, and hopefully some more of these holes will be closed soon to make it even harder to make running highly targeted campaigns more difficult. From where I'm sitting the sooner marketeers lose the capability to run targeted campaigns the better, and every little bit helps. On the plus side: your budgets will go up to reach the same effect so why complain?

davemel37 9y ago

This will actually make facebook ads cheaper...many people dont realize that facebook charges you a markup for some of these targeting audiences.

jedwhite 9y ago

I believe this is related to GDPR, which isn't clear in the article. This is the information from Facebook (via Dennis Yu from Blitz Metrics): // from Facebook: Although I have spoken with many of you just today and yesterday, I wanted to make you immediately aware of an update we received to third-party targeting, late this afternoon. We have a responsibility for the use of data on our platform - and we want to ensure that people have transparency and control over how their information is used. Over the past week, we announced important changes to reduce the amount of data that apps can request from users and ensure that people have more control over their information on Facebook. Now, to build on these efforts, we are going to be more restrictive in the way that we use data for advertising on our platform, particularly as it relates to information from third-party data providers. Specifically, over the next six months, we will remove the ability to use Partner Categories, a targeting solution that enables third-party data providers to offer their targeting directly on Facebook. While leveraging third-party data is a common industry practice and we've put good protections in place, we believe this step will help improve people's privacy on Facebook. We understand this may impact your advertising efforts on our platform, and we will work with you through this transition. In an attempt to minimize disruption, we will allow time for you to update your targeting. In light of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in the European Union, we have created a timeline to comply with the regulation: · May 10: After this date, you will no longer be able to create or edit campaign using Partner Categories built on audiences from the UK, Germany, and France; however, they will be allowed to continue running until May 24. · May 25: We will no longer deliver to Partner Categories built on audiences from the UK, Germany, and France, and these targeting options will no longer be available for use on our platform. You will notified to update any targeting containing impacted Partner Categories before this date. · June 30: Last day for creating new or editing existing campaigns using non-EU Partner Categories; they will be allowed to run until September 30. · October 1: All other Partner Categories will no longer be available as targeting options on our platform and we will stop delivering against these audiences. You will be notified to update your targeting by this date. Protecting people’s information is the most important thing we do. You can expect to hear more from us in the coming weeks as we continue to work to make our platform safer.

jacquesm 9y ago

oh_sigh 9y ago

I believe there is a saying about horses and gates which would be apposite.

rqs 9y ago

Well, as a Dumb fuck[0], I completely believe in Facebook will take all the necessary steps to protect my privacy. [0] https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mark_Zuckerberg https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Mark_Zuckerberg And of course you can down vote, but we will meet again in the next Facebook scandal :)

gaius 9y ago

But Facebook themselves still gather and keep the data? If so this is mere window dressing

dschuetz 9y ago

It's a step in the right direction, but still I don't trust Facebook making a decision like that. In the end they'll just replace it with something else which might turn out even worse than before. You cannot make money selling user data by cutting off data channels to your third party customer base. So, I'm waiting. Off Facebook.

nitwit005 9y ago

I would assume the issue was that they had to give these companies data in order to match up a facebook user with an ID in the third party systems. See, for example, BlueKai's integration documentation: https://docs.oracle.com/en/cloud/saas/data-cloud/dsmkt/integrating-oracle-bluekai-platform.html https://docs.oracle.com/en/cloud/saas/data-cloud/dsmkt/integ...

SeriousM 9y ago

Pfff, so? These companies have the data already, and if not, they have long 6 months to get them. This only tells me that Facebook is trying to act as we wish to yet acting as it always did.

jamescyber 9y ago

After Facebook now Namo App user data is not safe — Big privacy Concern After the viral exposure of loopholes in the Aadhaar security system in January’17 now it’s all about the Namo app it is being claimed that the application shares private information of its users with third party companies without their consent. Read it : https://www.ica.in/newsroom/namo-app-sharing-user-data https://www.ica.in/newsroom/namo-app-sharing-user-data

kristianc 9y ago

This is a fairly major change, and will have some fairly significant impacts on the AdTech industry. I'd go as far as saying this was the first really meaningful fallout from the CA scandal. I'd hazard a guess that not many ordinary users are even aware that retailers can upload their email addresses into Facebook and create targeting segments from them. As to what these changes do to the AdTech industry is anyone's guess. 'Onboarding' email addresses is basically LiveRamp's business model.

davemel37 9y ago
I highly doubt this had anything to do with CA, outside of some PR timing... third party data is stale and expensive and advertisers were already complaining of costs on FB... this will make it cheaper for mom and pop advertisers and scare away the affiliate marketers mostly.. facebooks owm data and first party audience data is still open season and where the ad dollar shift has been happening anyways... This was a smart biz decision and CA was just a convenient opportunity to roll out without too much backlash IMHO.
Uw7yTcf36gTc 9y ago
that's not what is being removed. It's 3rd party data that FB is purchasing not, that advertisers are providing through Custom Audiences for Lookalikes.

davemel37 9y ago

Honestly, I think this is a fallout of third party data being too expensive relative to the increase in performance more than anything else... middleware ad tech and data sellers are a failed experiment that has been a net negative for advertisers, users and publishers..all it did was just enrich some bloated ad tech startups to steal a piece of the pie...its a scam that floated on smoke and mirror attribution models...and advertisers who actually control their budgets have smartened up finally...its artificially propped up by agencies incentivized to spend more and make their clients look good in a powerpoint and colorful excel sheet...without true accountability to REALITY! I think we will see many more hits to the third party data world and ad tech that promises richer targeting without really serving the users or advertisers by enabling them to deliver better value...versus just paying twice for customers they would have anyways short of the third party selling your customers to your competitors...its a shell game and its finally coming crashing down!!! GOOD RIDDANCE!

davemel37 9y ago

One possible conspiracy... Facebook stock has dropped a bunch, site usage is down 24% and advertisers are leaving left and right... anounce these audience segments will be gone in 6 months but advertisers can A, reach them now and B, build first party audiences off this data by advertising to specific segments just to cookie folks... and the next two earnings calls show a big increase in ad spend!

vgy7ujm 9y ago

Zuck has to go.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

gcatalfamo 9y ago

Thanks to functional analphabets (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_illiteracy https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Functional_illiteracy) the advertising world is becoming much less interesting.

chatmasta 9y ago

So does the mean you can no longer import a list of emails / Facebook IDs for lookalike audience creation?

baxtr 9y ago

Facebook is to me a clear case, where missing company values created a huge mess. What are the core values/core beliefs of Facebook? I firmly believe that other than anything else a set of core values determines the long term fate of companies. Of course, it’s not enough to merely have a set of beliefs that you’ve put up nicely on the wall, but, rather, top management must speak and act according to these principles.

kushti 9y ago
The very core principle of any public corporation is to show positive metrics to its shareholders during board meetings.
- baxtr 9y ago
  That is a goal, not a principle to operate by. An no, this is not just semantics.
gt_ 9y ago
If you mean Facebook the tech firm, stop kidding yourself. It’s a for-profit enterprise, not a hero’s journey.
wu-ikkyu 9y ago
If you look at how Facebook was founded it's clear core values and ethics were not a priority from the beginning.

chicob 9y ago

I still don't see anyone addressing the elephant in the room: corporate, extensive personal data harvesting must stop. If this is Facebook's business model, Facebook must go. No one would allow the kind of pervasive intrusion put in practice by Facebook (and others) by the part of governing bodies, the police or the military. So why are we still allowing marketing companies to do it? Why are willing to let credit, insurance and health companies access our data in order to know us better than ourselves? When is this the price of a "better user experience"? It is disingenuous to say that people simply "agreed to this". No one can expect the average user to fully comprehend the inner workings of the modern web, and to what extent their data is being used, or even to keep up with changing terms of use for every single service. Some, like Tim Cook, are starting to address the issue but not as directly as one would expect.

matte_black 9y ago
If a credit company doesn't know who you are they will not loan you even one dollar. If an insurance company doesn't know who you are they will charge you the maximum to account for the risk. If a health company doesn't know your data they can't accurately diagnose trends in your health. Still want to play this game?
- jacquesm 9y ago
  If a credit card company or health company relies on a social media entity to decide whether to give you credit or to be able to accurately diagnose your health then they have other problems. None of that needs Facebook. Still want to play this game? Credit card companies were extending people credit and doctors were making accurate diagnoses long before the internet came along, they are definitely not a necessity for the functioning of society in ways that really matter.
  - matte_black 9y ago
    Can you say that with any certainty? You don't know what you can do with data really until you have it all available at your disposal.

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

bogomipz 9y ago

I think the last paragraph is the most important one: >"Facebook clarified that it will still work with companies like Experian and Acxiom in order to measure ad performance and provide metrics, although it will also be conducting a review of those ongoing relationships." These FB announcements the last couple of days seem little more than grooming for possible upcoming appearances in front of legislators. They can point to this and the surface-level app redesign and say they've "already" taken efforts to shore up concerns. I think most people have no idea that FB and Experian - a consumer credit reporting agency have been sharing data at all. Where was that explained in the app redesign that was trotted out yesterday? It's worth reading how Acxion who facing similar pressures recently handled their own superficial offering of "transparency": https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/05/technology/acxiom-lets-consumers-see-data-it-collects.html https://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/05/technology/acxiom-lets-co...

philipodonnell 9y ago
I would really like to know what data they are sharing with Experian. If its just helping them target ads then they should explain why Experian is allowed to continue, but I am more concerned with Experian being "creative" with Facebook's tools and incorporating some of that into their credit scoring models.
- mbrumlow 9y ago
  I am guessing it is something even worse. Like, Experian uses Facebook data to adjust credit scores. And some time in the near future your credit score will suck if you don't have a social media footprint.
  - nohat 9y ago
    A social media footprint on Facebook in particular, conveniently enough.
  - Spivak 9y ago
    Sure, but people already go to extreme lengths to groom their credit histories, at least this method doesn't require spending money. Just as an example, I have a friend who has an account that's older than her that her parents made for the sole purpose of bumping her score. Pulling data from more sources doesn't change the underlying problem of faceless businesses assigning people scores based on vague unknown requirements.

imcqueen 9y ago

I know it's been tried many times unsuccessfully, but with the benefit of hindsight now would you have preferred to pay a nominal annual fee for the handful of currently free services that you really like? I realize we're likely too far gone now, but it's fundamentally an issue that we aren't paying for these ad-supported services, so the companies gravitate toward serving the interests of the entities that are paying them. That's not a justification or reflection of my opinion about privacy and ethics around the use of data, just a thought around removing the problem from the equation all together. I guess my real question is, if you remove the profit seeking component of the data discussion does the bad behavior completely go away? Definitely interested in other opinions.

avoidit 9y ago

Before I went to read the article, I wondered if they would define first and second party here. And they do: Quote from the article: "In order to leverage the deep pool of data Facebook collects on users, the company mixes information that it obtains from users themselves (Pages a user liked, for instance) with information from advertisers (membership status in a loyalty program, for example) and with data obtained from third party providers." It is super interesting that they have no terminology at all for data collected via shadow profiles. I propose "zeroth party" data - they are shadow profiles after all. :-)

deleted 9y ago

[deleted]

slowandlow 9y ago

This won't stop the regulations coming their way. Facebook had the chance to prove they could be trusted but squandered it and may have ruined it for the tech industry. They know this and it's why they hired Washington lobbyists.

supercarsw 9y ago

Why I have a feeling that we gonna have now news.. "Oh, we are doing all this only to help you better". Thats why we collect your sms, locations and phonecalls data.

supercarsw 9y ago

the sell data on bonkers!