Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]

[madslug]

Originally Posted by dephormation

15,974

15,977

[Tharrick]

Originally Posted by phormwatch

Phorm's digital PR agency at work again:

http://deandonaldson.wordpress.com/2...-in-a-tea-cup/

i.e. Yet another pro-Phorm marketing blog.

Think I might pick some o' this apart:

All advertising is intrusive in nature. It’s like conversation ‘hey, have you seen blah’. You find yourself being led down a path not originally intended. It’s human nature. People dislike BAD advertising, not advertising per se. They discuss clever ads in conversation (From Smash and Charlie says to Sony Bravia and Cadbury’s Gorilla).

We're aware of this. It's an intrusion we accept out of necessity. Making it even MORE intrusive by spying on us to provide it however, is entirely unnecessary

People wear Jack Daniel’s tee shirts and Guinness hats. People tattoo themselves with their favourite football team. People want to brand themselves with Burberry, wear Levi’s jeans and Channel sunglasses and keep up-to-date with those trends and buy magazines to this avail and shop regularly in said brands shops. We HAVE to accept this is part of the fall out of brand building and there is your audience right there - and yes people like “good” advertising in that regard. They have chosen to opt in, even though ‘persuaded’ sub-consciously that it is the right thing for them.

Except that I don't. I don't wear branded clothes nor do I tattoo myself with logos, nor do I buy magazines that tell me what I should buy.

A user has a choice - pay for content, receive it free but accept advertising as a trading requirement, or steal it. All media consumption follows this model.

Yes. And since i'm paying for the system that sends me this content, I'm not expecting to be intruded on MORE given that I already accept the advertising currently present on websites to fund the content.

Police track ISP’s data. They are monitoring and watching what goes on for a reason – security.

Yes. And I don't mind the police or GCHQ or other governmental agencies being able to access logs of what I've done for reasons of national security. But when it's being done for purely commercial reasons, I have an issue with it.

Phorm do not link a personal identifier to any person

Apart from a unique user ID number.

Lots about grouping people into brackets

Utter poppycock, and absolutely nothing to do with how Phorm works.

Let me give worse case scenario. I look for ‘prams’ today via Google. My wife has a miscarriage this evening. Tomorrow am targetted with ‘Mama’s and Papa’s’ ads.

Not the worst-case scenario. Let's not forget the stated fears of (I think it was) Mr Berners-Lee, who was worried that browsing for information about cancer would jack up life insurance premiums. Not an issue with the way that Phorm says they do business - but they way they say they work and the way they actually do work don't always match up

[madslug]

Originally Posted by phormwatch

Phorm's digital PR agency at work again:

http://deandonaldson.wordpress.com/2...-in-a-tea-cup/

i.e. Yet another pro-Phorm marketing blog.

Does the writer know something about the cookie-less new phorm that has not yet been disclosed?

Phorm do not link a personal identifier to any person (that is the curent law, developed BEFORE the internet!), they merely group people into buckets and buckets within buckets - the technology is doing the job of the media agency in that regard, using technology in situ similar to that the police use.

Is he really saying that the UID has been dropped and that as you surf you will be rated as no more than an ABC1, etc.

And, what is this technology which is similar to that used by the police? Last time I looked, the police needed a court order to do that kind of snooping. Who has given Phorm the court order which allows them to do the same snooping?

Sorry, I don't agree that that blog is pro-phorm. Shooting it in the back more like

"A user has a choice - pay for content, receive it free but accept advertising as a trading requirement, or steal it. All media consumption follows this model."

Well, Phorm may be happy to be stealing it (they certainly are not offering any payment nor advertising by way of trading compensation) as part of its media consumption. Phorm just must not complain when the people they are stealing it from start to defend their property.

I am also not so sure that I agree with his view on branding either. I was very young when I first became aware of branding, probably a college student, and I thought that people were getting the clothes cheaper because they were helping to advertise them (who would pay to wear an advert?) - you can imagine my reaction when I found out that people were being conned into paying more for the privilege of doing all that free advertising for some company that they did not even work for. My view of brands has changed little in the years since: I gave up on 'uniforms' when I left school.
Anyone noticed how the exec range of cars has stopped carrying so many badges? Anyone noticing the difference in food cost inflation between the 'own brand' and branded ranges?

Talking of brands. The last few days I have started to see VirginMedia's new promo: The Mother of all Broadbands. Whoever their ad agency is has a very strange sense of humour, or is a very different generation. [It wouldn't be the same agency who came up with the 2012 logo, would it?]

[Tharrick]

Talking of brands. The last few days I have started to see VirginMedia's new promo: The Mother of all Broadbands. Whoever their ad agency is has a very strange sense of humour, or is a very different generation. [It wouldn't be the same agency who came up with the 2012 logo, would it?]

I remember the MOAB, and I certainly don't remember it being a good thing :P

Well, Phorm may be happy to be stealing it (they certainly are not offering any payment nor advertising by way of trading compensation) as part of its media consumption. Phorm just must not complain when the people they are stealing it from start to defend their property.

Ah, I forgot to mention that part while I was picking that post apart.

[madslug]

Just to add to the conclusion from the blog

Now I totally stand by ethical considerations in advertsing and appreicate Phorm is a mere catalyst for what is to come, but so was DoubelClick way back when.

Ethical considerations? DoubleClick has been banned from my computer and browser since I first heard about them. May Phorm remain banned too, for the same reasons plus the dozens of new reasons.

[Dephormation]

Originally Posted by phormwatch

Phorm's digital PR agency at work again:

http://deandonaldson.wordpress.com/2...-in-a-tea-cup/

i.e. Yet another pro-Phorm marketing blog.

"Pete said this on Your comment is awaiting moderation. July 30, 2008 at 9:53 pm".

Wonder if it gets 'moderated'

[icsys]

Brains said this on Your comment is awaiting moderation. July 30, 2008 at 11:01 pm

I wonder indeed

Originally Posted by on deandonaldson.wordpress.com July 30, 2008

"I want to throw some spanners into the Phorm debate. I know one of the senior guys at Phorm personally and spoken at length with him about exactly how the technology works - he knows I am one of the biggest advocates of ethical considerations in digital advertising, yet by same token I helped find him the job there."

Says it all really.

[phormwatch]

To see just how much Dean Donaldson takes ethics into consideration, consider his other blog posts, namely this one:

http://deandonaldson.wordpress.com/w...click-anymore/

---------- Post added at 01:54 ---------- Previous post was at 00:30 ----------

A list of organisations we could contact regarding Phorm...

EPIC Online Guide to Privacy Resources:

http://epic.org/privacy/privacy_resources_faq.html

This one:

http://www.cyber-rights.org/

Looks especially promising. There are also lists of relevant newsgroups, mailing lists, printed publications, conferences and events.

Let's get writing, people!

---------- Post added at 01:57 ---------- Previous post was at 01:54 ----------

Meanwhile... does anyone on here live in London?

It would be nice if we could print out a thousand of those flyers (the PDF versions) and put them on Tube carriages in the morning or before evening rush hour. People are bored as hell on the Tube and are always looking for something to read.

I would be willing to cover the costs for the printing if someone wants to contact me about this.

[madslug]

Originally Posted by phormwatch

Meanwhile... does anyone on here live in London?

It would be nice if we could print out a thousand of those flyers (the PDF versions) and put them on Tube carriages in the morning or before evening rush hour. People are bored as hell on the Tube and are always looking for something to read.

I would be willing to cover the costs for the printing if someone wants to contact me about this.

Don't forget the buses.

Just thinking that the same is probably true for anyone who lives at the edge of the commuter belt. Lots of people traveling to London from Southend, Bristol, Brighton, Norwich, Luton ....

It is just as easy to catch people on any High Street during the lunch hour: catch them after they have bought their sandwich so that they have something to look at while they eat. Hopefully they will share with everyone else when they are back in the office - doing their private surfing during the lunch break so easy to sign the petition.

Another potential source of interested readers is parents of teenages - they are just becoming aware of blyk spreading amongst their kids and they don't like 14 year-olds being offered all those adverts in exchange for free texts.

[popper]

Originally Posted by rryles

I really dislike this diagram. It seems to be trying to represent data flow and control flow at the same time. I find it very uninformative. Of course its purpose isn't to inform me, it is a PR tool.

i uploaded that here a long time ago so people didnt need to go offsite to see it as you linked,
10-04-2008, 02:49 #2807

or, for the direct url
http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/at..._diagram70.gif

it's far more informative that you give it credit for.

as the official released BT PR diagram, it shows cristal clear, to any court you might show it in,

that no matter what BT have said, all YOUR DATA is still passing through the layer7 DPI wiretapping kit after you opt-out.

it also shows and confirmed that they openly admit to unlawfully placing unauthorised cookies/data on your termal equipment (PC) when YOU refuse to give them permission to do so after you refuse to opt-in to webwise.

[Florence]

Reading this in the register today and it really has you thinking is this really the path our government wants us to head.
The International Olympic Committee (IOC) has admitted cutting a deal with the Chinese to allow the blocking of press access to some sensitive websites during the forthcoming Beijing games - despite previous assurances there would be no such censorship.

It wouold seem that they are heading that way with the allowing of Phorm as even if they don't authorise this type of use on the internet how can they be 100% sure that Phorm doesn't start to do this?

[feesch]

Waking up to find I have ruffled a few more feathers this morning...

Good, that was my intention. hello peoples. This is Dean Donaldson. Note I deliberately did not state my personal aspect on all this, I was merely posing a viewpoint to the counter-measure .

Advertsing works. Cookies are a part of the web - and you leave footprints. Whether we like it, agree with it or not - it is now here. 10% of ALL company revenue is spent on advertisng, and has been for last 90 years - whether on posters, TV ads, or sales men - because it works. Anyone think thet are immune to advertising must live on another planet, (and a quick check through your cupboards and wardrobes and garage will prove it!) but if you don't realise that you are being 'persuaded' then all credit to the 'persuaders', because that is their job.

How did you find my blog? Some "automated" system that enabled you to find content - that did not exist a few years ago. So you obviously appreciate technology advances to have your voice. So are we to herald all technology as inherently evil? Is it the medium or the message? Questions that have long been posed around - or you going to say 'rock music is evil, TV is evil' and go live in a Hamish community?

So my point is that advertsing and technology ARE part of the debate - and how both are combined and used is a given. You are not going to win this one by saying advertsing doesn't work and we don't want progress - there has to be a smarter and more navigatable solution.

---------- Post added at 08:53 ---------- Previous post was at 08:48 ----------

To see just how much Dean Donaldson takes ethics into consideration, consider his other blog posts, namely this one:

http://deandonaldson.wordpress.com/w...click-anymore/

@PhormWatch: Think you would do better to read this one.
http://deandonaldson.wordpress.com/2...ing-in-the-uk/

You may get a MUCH bigger picture of what is coming...

[Florence]

Welcome to Cableforum.
I will read your blog later today as this morning I am out most of the morning so haven't the time to give it a good read.

I am one who blocks adverts unless I am looking for something then I research it online I hate what I call force fed adverts relivent or irrelevent. With the added spice of putting a known spyware/malware person in charge of what is easy to descripe as a ISP network rootkit would make me want to move ISP to another with similar views as mine over this regardless of cost to me which I have already done.

[dav]

feesch, welcome to the debate.

One point that I think the advertisers are overlooking is that, yes, people do want more relevant ads, it is just that the system Phorm are proposing does not sit well with the human psyche. If I was to follow you around a shopping mall, just inside your peripheral vision, taking notes about everything you looked at and picked up, it wouldn't take long for you to become uneasy about it and wonder exactly what I was inferring from my notes and who I was going to give this info to.

Personally, I do recognise that advertising is a necessity and I get hacked off seeing a screenful of ads that mean nothing to me. Here's the thing though, I would happily TELL advertisers what ads I want served to my browser. All they have to do is ASK and leave me in control.

Control is the important factor to me. I've said this before...If a web ad agency can set up some system that gives me ads I'm interested in, I'll probably use it. It has to be on my terms though. Let me register with them, have my own personal preferences page where I tell them as much or as little as I'm comfortable with so they can match these against their current campaigns to send me ads on their partner sites. As my interests change, I'll change my preferences myself and see the effects immediately in the ads I'm served with. There's no need to track me. I'll tell you what ads I want. How much more targetted do you want?

[Tharrick]

Hi, Dean. Good to see you're willing to come here and discuss this with us.

Anyone think thet are immune to advertising must live on another planet, (and a quick check through your cupboards and wardrobes and garage will prove it!) but if you don't realise that you are being 'persuaded' then all credit to the 'persuaders', because that is their job.

I'd just like to say that I'm really very rarely affected by advertising, because I don't actually expose myself to any. Adblock deals with all the ads on the internet, I don't read many magazines (and the only one I read would be new scientist, which has adverts for various technological things which I really don't need in my room right now - maybe when I'm a mad scientist, yes, but not right now). And yes, let's look at my wardrobe. Trousers I bought after trawling through a number of shops looking for the plainest black trousers I could find. The shirts I own are all band shirts for bands that don't even play in this country very often, and have never advertised in this country, or my university society. My shoes? Military surplus.
The things that I have bought myself were things I went out looking for, and compared the benefits of the various things myself.

How did you find my blog? Some "automated" system that enabled you to find content - that did not exist a few years ago. So you obviously appreciate technology advances to have your voice. So are we to herald all technology as inherently evil? Is it the medium or the message? Questions that have long been posed around - or you going to say 'rock music is evil, TV is evil' and go live in a Hamish community?

This isn't what we're protesting. We're against a specific technological advance, not technology as a whole. I think everybody here would be happy with faster broadband, or bigger monitors, better processors etc., but that doesn't mean that we're not allowed to be distinctly worried about one specific piece of technology, especially one that opens up as much of a can of worms as this one does. This part of your stance is, as I've already described your habit of going on about separating people into brackets related to age and interest, has absolutely nothing to do with this debate.