From Kate Conger and Brian X. Chen's "A Change by Apple Is Tormenting Internet Companies, Especially Meta" in Friday's New York Times:
Meta’s warning and its cratering stock price were reminders that even among tech giants, Apple holds extraordinary sway because of its control of the iPhone. And the tech industry received a clear notice that a long-planned shift in how people’s information may be used online was having a dramatic impact on Madison Avenue and internet companies that have spent years building businesses around selling ads.
“People can’t really be targeted the way they were before,” said Eric Seufert, a media strategist and author of Mobile Dev Memo, a blog about mobile advertising. “That breaks the model. It’s not just an inconvenience that can be fixed with a couple of tweaks. It requires rebuilding the foundation of the business.”
Other internet companies that depend on ads felt the tremors, too. But smaller outfits appear to have been more nimble than Meta in their response to Apple’s changes...
Apple’s changes have far-reaching repercussions that may hurt consumers’ wallets, Mr. Seufert said, though consumers are overwhelmingly choosing not to be tracked. While Meta and other big media companies have developed new methods to target people with ads, some smaller brands, whose ads can no longer reach new customers, have found a different solution to the problem: raise prices.
My take: "Free internet" should probably be couched in quote marks. Your cookies and tracking data are not without value.
“some smaller brands, whose ads can no longer reach new customers, have found a different solution to the problem: raise prices.”
I’ve come to loathe NYT tech stories.
The NYT comments section to yesterday’s article describing Facebook’s share price decline was packed with thanks & glory to Apple. Many comment writers were unaware how deceptive & invasive Sandberg & Zuckerberg’s practices were until Apple gave us a choice to opt-out. The executives at FB need only look in the mirror to find the source of their woes.
It’s not OK to track teenagers, unless the teenager wants to be followed. Thanks to Apple, both the teenager and the billionaire should be afforded the same privacy. At least to some degree. It’s true Cook’s house is blurred out on maps, and I doubt there are very many teenagers with blurred houses. And I would think there are plenty of teenagers being physically threatened, considering life in many ghettos. As a share holder, I definitely want TC’s life to be protected. Life always seems to get complicated.
The internet is still 100% freely available on iOS and Android. The Apps, which rely on the the proprietary IP in iOS and Android, are subject to fees and regulation by the owners of the IP.
I plan to write to my senators later today opposing the so called “Open App Markets Act” and advocating for a GDPR act, with the core argument being the legal principle of “Cui Boni?” and noting that I don’t benefit from forcing alternative app stores, but I definitely suffer from the lack of regulation of the surveillance business.
I find it hard to believe many people even click on ads so there’s a lot of arrows that lay on the ground as a result.
Shooting an ad in a targeted direction and claiming victory, doesn’t make it successful unless your arrow sticks and the customer pays.