Australia’s online advertising industry is scrambling to oppose the federal government’s proposed privacy protections, which it claims present an “existential threat” to the sector.
Speakers at last week’s advertising technology conference Programmatic Summit 2023 told the audience the “government is not your friend” and is staffed by people who think their industry is “evil”.
A panel titled “Can Privacy Enhancing Technologies Save Use of Third-Party Data for Targeted Advertising?” was dominated by discussion on the Albanese government’s recently released long-running review of the Privacy Act.
The Attorney-General’s Office is now seeking feedback on more than 100 recommendations, including major reforms that would allow Australians to sue over serious invasions of privacy and to have the right to have their information erased.
The panel’s moderator, Peter Leonard, a UNSW Business School professor and principal of consultancy firm Data Synergies, kicked off the well-attended session by saying there were “people in the room running targeted advertising campaigns that consumer advocates consider surveillance and probably can’t be justified when fully exposed to the world”.
He turned to the Privacy Act reforms, which he said were a “major challenge” and likely to be implemented “unless industry finds a way to convince the government to wind back what it’s thinking”.
Leonard, who said recommendations were written by “a bunch of lawyers in Canberra who haven’t worked in the private sector and, in my view, think that digital advertising is a little or a lot evil”, critiqued changes as being overly broad or poorly considered. He singled out reforms that would require advertisers to explain to users how they’re targeting them and to consider whether data collection is “fair and reasonable”. He also raised the possibility of class actions against advertisers.
“You want to tell people that they’ve been targeted because of an inclusion list [a programmatic advertising method that allows advertisers to choose people who their ads will be served to]? That’s going to scare the hell out of them,” he said.
Other panellists also raised concerns about the Privacy Act reforms. Sarah Waladan, director of policy and regulatory affairs at Australia’s advertising industry group IAB Australia, said the new definition of “targeting” and accompanying restrictions were a “massive, massive problem”.
She claimed that the recommendations, if implemented, would conflict with consumer law by not allowing advertisers to target offers to audiences who could take them up: “If you can’t segment by New South Wales, that mean someone in New South Wales would receive an offer for a competition that’s only available to residents in the Northern Territory, which would be problematic.”
Sarla Fernando, head of regulatory and advocacy advisory at programmatic advertising industry group ADMA, also took issue with reforms that would allow individuals to opt out of targeted advertising without having a service withdrawn. She said consumer loyalty schemes like Flybuys would not be commercially viable if people could choose not to have their data used as an example.
“Consumers want that stuff. That’s why they sign up … But if you need to be able to withdraw your consent, how does that actually apply?”
Fernando said the industry was coming up with specific “use cases” that they would use to fight against the recommendations.
“If we get more use cases, we as an industry can say, ‘We get what you’re trying to do but let’s see what it’s like in application.’ And [the government] is listening,” she said.
