Cheatsheet: Internet giants weigh in on U.S. privacy law
It’s becoming more likely that the U.S. will pass its own version of Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation. Facebook’s Cambridge Analytica scandal appeared to set things in motion earlier this year, and the subsequent passage of a sweeping privacy law in California has spurred major internet companies to get on board.
Amazon, Apple, AT&T, Charter, Google and Twitter support a comprehensive consumer privacy law in the U.S., executives from those companies said during a Senate hearing Sept. 26 held by the Senate Commerce Committee. Here’s what you need to know about their game plan.
How we got here
Companies have issues with the consumer privacy law that California passed in June. Until it takes effect in over a year, they are racing to find ways to delay or squash it, to the point that they’re willing to support a federal privacy law that would preempt it. Companies want to avoid complying with a patchwork of regulations from multiple states, if others follow California’s example.
What the internet companies want
They want to regulate themselves. But with the passage of California’s privacy law, that’s no longer an option, so they’re aiming for something less burdensome than the GDPR and California’s privacy law but just stringent enough to satiate the amplified calls for better consumer privacy protections. Len Cali, svp of global public policy at AT&T, acknowledged the “growing agreement of the need for new and comprehensive federal privacy law.”
What the internet companies will accept
What the internet companies need
Clarity. If Congress is going to pass a law regulating how companies collect and manage people’s personal information, then companies want to know what exactly qualifies as personal information — and hope it’s limited to sensitive and personally identifiable information like their name or email address, as opposed to something obscure like their web browsing history.
What the internet companies don’t want
To have to ask for permission before they can collect people’s personal information. They also don’t want a law preventing them from encouraging people to give them their information. That would nullify retailers’ loyalty programs that track people’s purchases while providing them with discounts in exchange, said Cali, who may have also been thinking how such a stipulation would bar AT&T from discounting people’s subscription fees in exchange for tracking them around the web.
‘We’re letting Facebook grade their own homework’: Here’s how advertisers’ desired changes differ from overall boycott
The overall goals of civil rights advocates organizing the boycott differ slightly from those of advertisers.
How Facebook’s brand safety audit with the Media Rating Council will work
The MRC audit will determine whether Facebook has applied an advertising adjacency standard into its brand safety protections.
Member Exclusive‘Are you going to put people over profit?’: As Facebook boycott continues, DTCs still running ads on the platform in a tricky spot
The Facebook boycott is part of a larger cultural shift towards a more “values-based consumerism.”
SponsoredWhy data clean rooms are a start, but not enough
Clean rooms are intended to be a “safe space” for brands to collaborate with walled gardens, but the greater opportunity for all brands is bringing together all of their data to create a single source of truth that they own and can continually enrich.
WTF is California’s new, and potentially stronger, privacy law?
In November, California residents will vote on the state's second privacy law, which is basically the CCPA 2.0
‘Influencer deals are being paused’: As Facebook boycott begins in earnest, influencer marketing feels a sting
The latest move to pause influencer marketing comes as marketers are not only reconsidering where their ads appear and the kind of content they appear next to, but as they work to figure out how they can better support Black creators and Black-owned businesses following the Black Lives Matter (BLM) protests.