SAN FRANCISCO — Google will begin using data from
billions of credit and debit card transactions — including card numbers,
purchase amounts and time stamps — to solve the advertising
juggernaut’s long-standing quest to prove that online ads prompt
consumers to make purchases in brick-and-mortar stores, the company said
on Tuesday.
The advance, which enables Google to tell retailers
how many sales they created through their digital ad campaigns, is a
step toward what industry insiders have long described as the “holy
grail” of digital advertising. If effective, the program could help
persuade marketers to choose Google’s services over the television
advertising that still gobbles up the lion’s share of retailers’ ad
budgets.
“Google — and also Facebook — believe that in order to
get digital dollars from advertisers who are still primarily spending on
TV, they need to prove that digital works,” said Amit Jain, chief
executive of Bridg, a digital advertising startup that matches online to
offline behavior.
The announcement comes as Google is working to
move past a boycott of YouTube, its lucrative video site, after news
reports that advertising for mainstream brands was appearing alongside
extremist content, including sites featuring hate speech and violence.
But Googles's latest move to tie people’s digital trails to their real
world behaviors is likely to renew concerns over whether technology
giants and their affiliated companies know too much about people’s lives
— and whether they disclose enough about how they collect and use that
information.
Google collects massive amounts of personal data
from smartphones and desktop computers, including location information
from Google Maps and other apps, the search terms that people use in a
Google search, and people’s Web browsing habits. All of that information
is tied to the real identities of users when they log into Google's
services.
Google executives say they are using complex,
patent-pending mathematical formulas to protect the privacy of consumers
when they match a Google user with a shopper who makes a purchase in a
brick-and-mortar store. The mathematical formulas convert people’s names
and other personal information into anonymous strings of numbers. The
formulas make it impossible for Google to know the identity of the
real-world shoppers, and for the retailers to know the identities of
Google’s users, Google executives said. The companies know only that a
match has been made.
In addition, Google does not get a detailed description of the individual transactions, just the amount spent.
“Through
a mathematical property we can do double-blind matching between their
data and our data,” said Jerry Dischler, vice president of product
management for AdWords, in an interview. “Neither gets to the see the
encrypted data that the other side brings.”
Dischler, who said
the company had been working on the technology for years, described the
modeling as a “revolutionary” step forward for both Google and
advertisers.
But Google declined to share anything more than basic information about how the program worked.
Google
would not say how merchants had obtained consent from consumers to pass
along their credit card information. In the past, both Google and
Facebook have obtained purchase data for a more limited set of consumers
who participate in loyalty programs. Consumers that participate in
loyalty programs are more heavily tracked by retailers, and often give
consent to share their data with third parties as a condition of signing
up. (Not all consumers may realize they have given such consent, according to the digital privacy advocacy group Electronic Frontier Foundation).
The
technology giants introduced the use of what it called "double-blind
encryption" in these initiatives. Dischler said that users who signed
into Google’s services, including Gmail, Maps, Google Search, the Chrome
browser, or the Google Play store, had consented, during the setup
process, to Google sharing their data with third parties.
Tuesday’s
initiative enables Google to use transaction data from a much wider
swath of consumers than ever before, but the lack of detail on how
personal data was being handled caused concern for privacy advocates.
"What's
really fascinating to me is that as the companies become increasingly
intrusive in terms of their data collection, they also become more
secretive," said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic
Privacy Information Center. He urged government regulators and Congress
to demand answers about how Google and other technology companies are
collecting and using data of their users.
Peter Eckersley,
technology projects director for the Electronic Frontier Foundation,
expressed skepticism about whether the "double-blind encryption"
described by Google could protect privacy effectively. "In the past when
companies have claimed to anonymize data using cryptographic hash
functions, that anonymization has been flimsy and easily broken. So this
may well be a massive betrayal of the trust that consumers have placed
in Google and their credit card companies, to keep their data
confidential. But we won't even know for sure until Google publishes
clear information on how it is handling this data."
Google
declined to disclose the names of the affiliated companies that play a
key role in handling consumers' data. Retailers that participate in the
program don’t provide the transaction data to Google directly. They
share it with third-party data brokers that encrypt the information
before passing it along.
Such data providers have been the
targets of cybercriminals in the past. In 2015, a hack of data broker
Experian exposed the personal information of 15 million people.
The
tech giant also declined to describe its mathematical formulas in
anything more than vague terms, citing a pending patent. Dischler said
the work was based on a 2011 research paper by three MIT scientists. That research was funded by Google and Citigroup.
In
addition to culling data from loyalty programs, Google and Facebook
have used location data in their quest to measure whether consumers who
viewed an online ad were influenced to go shopping in a brick-and-mortar
store. In these cases, the companies roughly determine a person’s
location — for example, whether they are inside or near a Home Depot or a
mall — from GPS or other signals given off by smartphones.
But
actual purchase information is a much more powerful signal than a rough
location estimate, Jain said. “These companies have to invest in finding
the identity of the consumer at the moment when that shopper is at the
cash register."
Timberg reported from Washington D.C.
No comments:
Post a Comment