Android-based operating system glasses with a 3G or 4G data connection might be on the list of must-haves for techies by some time midyear. Reports put Google behind the project, but it's unclear whether Motorola Mobility patents contribute to the hardware device or the exploratory focus. For a cost of between $250 and $600, consumers could have an option to purchase the small-screen glasses with motion and GPS sensors designed by Google. The Los Angeles Times cites anonymous Google employees familiar with the project. Will these devices give online advertising another screen or expand the ability to collect data? Seth Weintraub at 9 to 5 Google first noted the lab and wearable technology in December. As more wearable devices come online, companies will need to become more sensitive to data collection. During the OMMA Data & Behavioral conference in New York on Wednesday, Marc Groman, executive director and general counsel at the Network Advertising Initiative, commented on privacy and data collection. He used a data-train metaphor to convince attendees to self-regulate their data collection practices or risk derailing the train and halting innovation for all. Google isn't the only company experimenting with wearable computing technology. Patents filed by Apple and Microsoft allude to wearable computing or display projects. Similarly, a patent updated in February 2012 by Digimarc describes next-generation wearable devices -- from cameras to displays on eyewear. The Digimarc patent calls out the practice of advertising vs. data collection: "As with Google, collection of raw data from the system may prove more valuable in the long term than presenting advertisements to users." Google's glasses would further the trend that electronic companies like Infineon Technologies tried to ignite in early 2000. In its 2004/2005 winter collection, sportswear manufacturer O'Neill Europe unveiled in Munich a wearable electronics product. Jointly designed with Infineon the snowboard jacket, dubbed The Hub, was made to withstand freezing and harsh environments. Woven into The Hub snowboard jacket were electronically conductive fabric tracks that connect the chip module to a fabric keyboard and built-in speakers in the helmet. The module contained a MP3 player with Bluetooth capabilities that the snowboard could use to control music and a mobile phone. It was part of a movement by the electronics and clothing industry to develop smart-fabrics and interactive textiles. At the time, other companies were working to include this type of technology in the walls of buildings and in carpets. During the next five years, it is estimated the market for wearable wireless devices in sports and health care will grow to 169.5 million devices in 2017 -- up from 20.77 million in 2011, a CAGR of 41%, according to ABI Research.
In an ironic twist, America appears to be leading a turnaround in the global ad economy. The development is ironic because some economists believe the U.S. triggered the ad recession in the first place with its sub-prime lending crisis, which has stabilized as Western Europe’s credit crisis unravels. But in a report released early this morning, WARC says the “American recovery” is boosting global ad spending and helping to sustain momentum across the globe, even in Europe. “Marketing spend in the Americas increased sharply in February,” WARC says in an update to its monthly Global Marketing Index, noting that while marketers have “cut budgets again” in European and APAC markets, the “trading outlook” has nonetheless improved, because of the global momentum triggered by the U.S. ad recovery. Noting that its index shows marketers at their “most positive” point since WARC began publishing it five months ago, WARC Data Editor Suzy Young attributed much of the momentum to the U.S., where the index jumped to 62.9 in February from 56.5 in January. “The region has seen confidence rise across the board,” she writes, citing improving conditions in media trading, marketing budgets and agency staffing, and noting that “this suggests that macro conditions in the U.S. are markedly improving." While the rest of the global ad marketplace remains in flux, the WARC data shows a 2.6-point rise in Asia-Pacific to an index of 56.0 this month. That should be good news for key Asian markets -- especially Japan, where the lingering effects of its earthquake and tsunami had devastated advertising confidence as well. Coincidentally, Tokyo-based ad giant Dentsu released data this morning showing that total ad spending in Japan fell 2.3% during 2011, which was attributed largely to the impact of its natural disasters. Dentsu, which is the parent of U.S. agencies such as 360i and mcgarrybowen, noted that on a quarterly basis, the Japanese ad marketplace “recovered steadily in the second half of the year, and was higher in the October-December quarter than during the same period in 2010. Dentsu said traditional media fell 2.6% for the year, although TV was “relatively steady” and Internet ad spending rose 4.1% in what historically has been one of the world’s biggest advertising marketplaces. Meanwhile, WARC also offered some encouraging news for European ad markets, noting that while it still lags other global regions in macro terms, February shows “improving conditions” for the continent. Europe’s index managed to gain 1.6 points, rising to 52.0 in February. “It is the surest sign yet that the region is beginning to rebound following the protracted uncertainty surrounding sovereign debt crises in the Eurozone,” Warner wrote.
Growing faster than some experts expected, Google’s display advertising business is on pace to surpass Facebook’s by next year, according to eMarketer. In 2013, eMarketer anticipates that Google’s U.S. display revenues will grow 45.3% to $3.68 billion, while Facebook’s will grow 27.6% to $3.29 billion. David Hallerman, principal analyst at eMarketer, attributes Google’s astonishing success to a thriving mobile display business, YouTube’s expanding role as a venue for premium display inventory, and strong growth from the company’s DoubleClick ad network. “The strength of Google’s existing relationships with search advertisers has also been a tremendous help for the company’s display business,” according to Hallerman. At the same time, eMarketer revised its figures for Facebook downward slightly after the company’s S-1 filling revealed a slower-than-expected growth rate for 2011, particularly in the fourth quarter. Last year, net U.S. display ad revenues at Google hit $1.71 billion, while Facebook raked in $1.73 billion -- helping the social network beat out Yahoo as the top seller of display advertising online. This year, domestic display revenue growth at Facebook and Google will be nearly identical -- around 48% year-over-year -- with Facebook expected to earn $2.58 billion in revenue, compared to Google’s $2.54 billion, eMarketer predicts. In 2011, the overall U.S. display ad market -- including Web video, sponsorships, rich media and banner ads -- grew 25.2% to $12.4 billion in 2011, eMarketer estimates -- and will increase to $15.39 billion in 2012. Facebook’s share of U.S. display ad market revenues grew to 14% in 2011 -- up from 11.5% in 2010. This year, Facebook’s share is expected to grow to 16.8%. Google’s share of U.S. display ad revenues is expected to reach 16.5% in 2012 -- up from 13.8% in 2011, and 12.1% in 2010, when the company closed its deal to purchase mobile advertising company AdMob. Sure to worry some marketers, Google and Facebook are pulling away from other contenders in the display advertising business. Representing immense power, Google and Facebook’s combined display ad revenues will account for 33.3% of total display ad spending in 2012, eMarketer predicts -- rising to 38.8% in 2014. Conversely, Yahoo will see its share of the U.S. display market fall to 9.1% this year -- from 10.8% in 2011. That’s a far cry from 2008, when Yahoo’s share peaked at 18.4%, eMarketer notes. Also, Marketer expects Microsoft's share of display revenues to shrink to 4.4%, this year from 4.5% in 2011, while AOL’s share will fall to 4% in 2012 -- from 4.3% last year.
Traditional metrics to measure searches don't work well with tools like Google Instant and Yahoo Search Direct, or with emerging technologies like voice and gesture. Until now, the industry has relied on data firms like comScore, but Shashi Seth, senior vice president of search products at Yahoo, believes the problem represents deeper issues and the responsibility should be with execs at the largest engines. "People at Yahoo, Google and Microsoft need to come together and share opinions on new metrics," he said. Advancements in search and marketing technologies point to inadequacies in long-established methods to accurately measure query volume. Yahoo has begun to test the ability to start a query on one device and continue it on another. For example, searching for a local restaurant on a desktop PC, finding a location and saving the search to continue it on a mobile device, such as iPad or smartphone. Signing into a Yahoo ID account allows the engine to connect searches on smartphones to tablets, desktops and laptops. Searchers will not only benefit from being able to save queries and continue them on another device, but advertisers will have an option to target ads across devices. Seth said Yahoo could release the tool within the next few months. Both Microsoft and Google have been working to personalize searches by integrating screens and ad targeting across platforms when signed in through a Google account or a Windows Live ID account. "Searches have been sliced and measured based on overall clicks, but not by the individual users or history," Seth said. You can imagine how social signals and interest graphs have begun to improve pushing out information." Seth said crossing screens creates a huge data problem, but search engines are good at analyzing tons of data in short periods of time. Data also becomes an issue for image search -- another challenge Yahoo continues to address. The company is working on a feature supported by recognition software that lets consumers look for similar items and drills down to specific criteria on queries. For example, a search for a lookalike Manolo Blahnik shoe at a cost of less than $200. Image matching and recognition means the algorithms must remove the colors and the curves of the shoes, and reduce the photo to a mathematical equation. The technology must be able to search large amounts of data and return results in milliseconds, either a typed query of voice search. New search features and tools that provide answers, rather than links, produce ample data. So Yahoo has begun to build a content index, instead of Web index, for every HTML page that exists. It connects information in a way that search engines have not done before. "It's been a large undertaking, but should solve pretty deep problems when finding exact answers to questions," Seth said. "We're doubling the size of the index yearly."
The ad industry's self-regulatory group Digital Advertising Alliance now supports the idea that consumers should be able to opt out of all online behavioral advertising through a browser-based do-not-track header, the group's lawyer, Stuart Ingis, said on Wednesday. "The DAA will immediately begin work to add browser-based header signals to the set of tools by which consumers can express their preferences," Ingis told reporters during a conference call. The Federal Trade Commission has called for a universal do-not-track mechanism that's simple and universal. Mozilla recently introduced a do-not-track header that consumers can activate, but only a handful of ad networks had agreed to honor it. In the future, however, companies that adhere to self-regulatory standards will be required to honor browser-based headers, Ingis says. "It isn't an option," he says. "It will be a requirement." The DAA already requires companies to notify users about behavioral targeting via an icon, and to allow consumers to opt out of online behavioral advertising via cookies. Ingis says that any company that licenses the icon from the DAA will also be required to respect users' browser-based settings. FTC Chair Jon Leibowitz praised the DAA's announcement. "People care enormously about privacy," he said. "We have always called for a do-not-track option that's persistent, that's universal, that's easy to use," he said. Leibowitz adds that companies that break privacy promises to consumers are subject to enforcement actions. Browser-based tools differ significantly from the cookie-based opt-outs that the industry has long supported. One drawback of cookie-based opt-outs is that they're unstable, because privacy-conscious consumers who delete their cookies end up purging the cookie that communicates that they don't wish to be tracked. In addition, cookie-based mechanisms sometimes have glitches, like broken opt-out links. Jules Polonetsky, co-chair and director of the think tank Future of Privacy Forum, agreed that a browser-based do-not-track header will give users a simple way to opt out of behavioral targeting. "It's far more effective than cookies, because it doesn't get deleted when cookies get deleted. In another privacy-related development, the Obama Administration is supporting a "Consumer Privacy Bill of Rights" that incorporates the idea that users should be able to control what kinds of data companies collect.
Google will move into traditional TV waters next year after filing for a couple of cable TV franchises in the Midwest last Friday. Google filed state regulatory papers for cable TV licenses for its Google fiber service in Kansas City, Kansas and Kansas City, Missouri. Two Sanford C. Bernstein Internet analysts, Carlos Kirjner and Craig Moffett, say this could mean the “broadband-only business model is not economically viable." Google owns the YouTube video platform. Last year, reports said that Google was considering a cable TV service in Kansas City with possible deals with Walt Disney, Time Warner and Discovery Communications. The incumbent cable provider in Kansas City is Time Warner Cable. What is Google's real intent? According to analysts, Council Bluffs, Iowa is home to a large Google data center -- a city within the cable franchise area. Another theory is that this will provide Google with the favored public policy position of Net-neutrality. It could also provide a laboratory for Google to learn about technology and consumer behavior -- the impact of higher-speed access on Internet usage, as well as the potential of different ad formats and models. Google TV Ads already sells TV advertising for a number of cable systems and some small- to mid-size cable TV networks. "We are still exploring what product offering will be available when we launch Google Fiber in Kansas City," says a Google spokeswoman. The scheduled launch will take place some time in 2012.
Full-year data released by mobile ad network Millennial Media underscores how dramatically Android expanded in 2011 -- at the expense of Apple’s iOS platform. Android impressions increased more than 500% on the network, propelling the Google mobile operating system from 33% to 47% share of all impressions. At the same time, iOS impressions dropped from 41% to 30% last year. BlackBerry-maker Research in Motion held fairly steady during 2011, dropping to 16% from 18% share of impressions. The Millennial findings roughly parallel the most recent comScore data on overall U.S. market share for the top smartphone platforms. It showed that Android had 47.3%; iOS, 29.6%; and BlackBerry, 16% as of December. Apple, however, remained easily the top manufacturer on the Millennial network, while the iPhone was the leading handset model. Apple devices accounted for 26% of impressions last year, unchanged from 2010. The big gainer last year was HTC, which nearly doubled its market share to 14% and pushed past RIM to rank as the No. 3 manufacturer behind Apple and Samsung. The iPhone’s market share over 2011 dropped only slightly to about 15% -- still well ahead of its nearest rival, the BlackBerry Curve, at almost 6%. Both Samsung and HTC had four phones in the top 20 on Millennial’s network, highlighting the dramatic growth both enjoyed in 2011 on the strength of Android device sales. Reflecting the spread of smartphones and tablets, the proportion of touchscreen devices used on the network increased from 46% to 57%. The share of smartphones themselves grew from 55% to 68%, with feature phones as a result falling from 31% to 17%. Driven mainly by iPad sales, the share of other connected devices rose to 15% from 14%. Looking at mobile applications, Millennial found gaming titles were the most popular in 2011, followed by music and entertainment, social networking, communications, and news apps. News as an app category moved up to the No. 5 slot from No. 8 last year.
Verizon's planned alliance with three cable companies will undermine competition and harm consumers, advocacy groups argue in petitions filed with the Federal Communications Commission. Public Knowledge, New American Foundation Open Technology Initiative and Writers Guild of America, West, and other groups are asking the FCC to block the companies from following through with their plans. The deal, announced in December and awaiting regulatory approval, calls for Verizon to pay $3.6 billion to license spectrum from Comcast, Time Warner and BrightHouse Networks. The agreement also provides for Verizon and the cable companies to market each other's services. Verizon and Comcast are already co-marketing their services in Seattle, Portland and the San Francisco area. They are offering a quadruple-play deal that allows consumers who sign up for Comcast's Xfinity TV bundle and Verizon's mobile phone service to receive a $300 prepaid Visa debit card. Critics argue that the arrangement will prove anti-competitive, especially given that Verizon recently stopped expanding its high-speed FiOS network. "To 'supersize' Verizon Wireless with additional spectrum from Comcast, Time Warner Cable, BrightHouse, and Cox so that the largest wireless operator can better promote the services of the largest incumbent cable operators directly undermines the pro-competitive policies of the 1996 Act and is thus contrary to the public interest," Public Knowledge and other watchdogs argue in a joint petition. "Even charitably interpreted, the joint agreements provide a mechanism for future collusion on pricing, building out, coverage, and other market control methods." The advocacy groups also warn that Verizon and the cable companies "would have an incentive to develop handset technology that can easily hand off calls between their respective networks, but not between others." They add that the companies would "have the means and motivation to develop proprietary standards for the delivery of video over broadband, inhibiting the development of independent online video providers and putting their competitors at a disadvantage." The advocacy group Free Press argued in a separate petition that the deal will result in Verizon controlling more than 33% of all mobile broadband spectrum and will give Verizon and AT&T a combined 60% share. "Not only will these transactions doom the wireless market to permanent duopoly status, but their associated joint cartelization agreements will further tilt the wireline market towards a cable monopoly, forever ending any hope of wireless-wireline or cable-telco competition." T-Mobile also weighed in against the deal. "Allowing Verizon Wireless to continue to aggregate spectrum unchecked would necessarily preclude access to this spectrum by smaller competitors that will use it more quickly, intensively, and efficiently than Verizon Wireless," T-Mobile argues. "The acquisition effectively will limit the bandwidth available for the deployment of LTE by competitors of Verizon Wireless."
JPMorgan Chase has made an undisclosed investment in mobile payments service GoPago, whose app enables users to pay for goods and services at local stores. GoPago (formerly Pago Mobile) rolled out its app -- available on the iPhone and Android and BlackBerry devices -- last August with more than 50 participating merchants in Mountain View, Calif., where it’s based. Consumers can use the app to order and purchase items at local restaurants and businesses including Quiznos, KFC and Baskin Robbins. Users can also get special deals from retailers via the free app. On the merchant side, business owners use an iPad to receive incoming orders, accept payments and track customer loyalty. GoPago says businesses benefit by being able to easily set up mobile storefronts and gain a stream of data and analytics to help them better target special offers to drive sales. “We are here to help local businesses modernize while maintaining their intimate customer experience,” said founder and CEO Leo Rocco, in a statement. For its part, Chase is placing a bet in the emerging mobile wallet space. Through the deal, Chase customers will have access to exclusive offers and discounts in the GoPago app from the bank’s merchant partners. Later in the year, Chase business customers will have the opportunity to create a free mobile storefront through GoPago. Chase will also be the exclusive financial services marketing partner of the company.
Luminate, which helps Web publishers turn images into ads, has secured $10.7 million in a third-round venture funding led by Nokia Growth Partners and includes prior investors August Capital, CMEA Capital, Google Ventures and Shasta Ventures. That brings its total raised to date to about $28 million. Luminate plans to use the new funding to improve its technology, expand its publisher network and broaden relationships with brand advertisers. The company already counts 7,000 sites in its network from publishers including Hearst, CBS, msnbc and Parade. Formerly known as Pixazza, Luminate allows publishers to monetize images on their sites by embedding them with widgets that can power online shopping, advertising and social sharing within the photos themselves. Sites integrate the company’s service by adding a single line of Javascript code to their pages and selecting which types of in-image apps to use. On the consumer side, users mouse over images on sites in the Luminate network to see information about products similar to those pictured, along with links to external sites. (A company icon in the corner of a photo indicates an image is interactive.) Luminate works with more than 75 merchants and advertisers, including Zappos, Nordstrom, Macy's, and Gap and maintains a database of 20 million products tagged in images across the Web. Publishers can also add apps that let users share images via email, Facebook, or Twitter, get more information about a particular event, or learn more about people featured in a photo. A separate app lets them overlay relevant advertising within images. Today, Luminate introduced another nine specialized apps that will allow users to do things within images, including making donations, viewing related images using Bing, watching movie trailers of actors shown in photos via YouTube, and purchasing the songs of artists shown from Amazon.com. The company has also launched what it calls an Image App Store, where publishers can browse and demo different titles before installing them. Later this year, Luminate plans to open up its platform to third-party developers to come up with additional in-image apps. Paul Asel, managing partner of Nokia Growth Partners, will join the company’s board of directors in connection with the financing.
Memo to: Mark Zuckerberg From: Alexandre Mars, CEO of Phonevalley and Head of Mobile of Publicis Groupe Re: Mobile Advertising – Bring It! Mark, I wanted to draw attention to the fact that you are the king of mocial (mobile/social as I call it). Next to weather and things like catapulted avians, in terms of share of consumer attention on mobile devices, you absolutely rule. Just take a look at your 10-K filing. You’ve got 425 million active monthly mobile users as of December ’11 (note: that is not the number of people who have ever downloaded the app, but an active user number, which is what advertisers really care about). Mobile devices basically enable and enhance people wanting to share information via Facebook. I personally can’t watch TV without my phone in my hands. And if I’m like a whole lot of consumers, I am also reacting to TV ads with my phone and telling my friends about things from marketers that capture my attention. Wow, you actually are making one-way media interactive. Powerful stuff. But what’s wrong with this picture? There are no ads to monetize all that focused, engaged consumer attention. And despite the fact that your character in "The Social Network" constantly said no to ads, you are now driving the largest volume of impressions in wired display and have disrupted that ecosystem entirely, leaving Yahoo and Microsoft, our former reach leaders, to scramble for new ways to connect with mass audiences. And yes, despite the cut of virtual goods sold, you admitted in your 10-K that 85% of your current revenue is related to advertising. I’m writing to encourage you to just turn them on. Yes, consumers may be a bit alarmed at the change, but just like with any other media, they tend to become accepting over time. Did turning on ads on the web version of Facebook kill your traffic? Hardly. I know that according to sources like Ad Age, you are considering inserted sponsored posts into consumer’s feeds. But what’s wrong with a good and basic banner unit? I want to draw your special attention to what you will get if you add an ad to each page of Facebook content that you do not get from the wired web: 1. Unparalleled reach: of those millions globally who access Facebook on a regular basis. Mobile has long been derided as too fragmented for marketers. With one ad unit, you solve that problem. 2. Focused attention and likely higher recall: there is one ad per page of content and thus no clutter, and that ad is in line of site (unlike the wired web, there are no ads “below the fold”). There is a true association of the ad with that content. Marketers are going to love this. 3. The ad unit may be a simple banner at the top or bottom of content, but it can open up to so much more. We’ve made great strides with rich media and several companies now have the capability of creating engaging full-screen ad executions that run across mobile web, app and phone platforms. You are the unifying force because you provide unparalleled scale. Regardless of phone or modality, people just love Facebook. It’s a part of their lives. Marketers want to reach consumers through their passion points. Take away their Facebook one day and you will see passion -- a negative sort -- expressed. 4. No potential privacy intrusive concerns about the matching of data from people’s profiles with the ads. We don’t have persistent cookies in mobile. You run decent ads; you frequency cap them. You can target them by IP for basic location relevance or if the consumer has turned on location from within the app, you get even greater location precision. The ads will likely deliver on both direct-response and brand metrics as we know how focused people are when they check their Facebook stream; after all, it’s content they created that is tailored to their interests. But what will consumers say, you ask? Yes, it may take some getting used to -- but time and time again, consumers have voted for ad support over paying for content. (For proof of this, see the current trends in app store payment supported by app analyst company Distimo. As more and more apps are released, the pressure on pricing is downward and more apps are choosing ad support or freemium models.) If you want to be really smart, you give consumers a choice: they get an ad-supported version or they pay a one-time fee for download of the app. In all the research that Publicis’s VivaKi division has done with consumers and interactive advertising through an initiative called The Pool, the more consumers are given a choice, the higher the recall and favorability they extend to the brands involved. Let’s say they choose ad support and you sell a one day takeover of all U.S. inventory to an advertiser like Wal-Mart. Wal-Mart gets unparalleled reach and the ad makes the explicit connection that your Facebook activity for the day is brought to you by. Yes, Mark -- it’s a bold step to embrace advertising in mobile. But it’s the right move. And something tells me that you’re going to make a lot of money out of this. The advice is free, just friend me back some time. I promise not to post any cat pictures.
We are in the year of “big data.” In fact, we may be in the age of big data, too. Users are generating more data than ever by their actions online -- clicking, talking, “like-ing,” etc. And marketers are gathering more data than ever with new analytics tools, social media monitoring platforms, mobile analytics, etc. But in many cases, brands and their agencies are drowning in the data rather than making coherent use of it. Making Sense of New DataThere is a reason the new data from digital channels has not been fully understood or used so far. It’s all apples-to-oranges when compared with metrics from traditional ad channels, such as TV, print, and radio. The new metrics of click-throughs, pageviews, time-on-site, etc. cannot easily been compared to gross ratings points, circulation, etc. Traditional metrics are referred to as reach and frequency metrics, and digital metrics are often referred to as engagement metrics. Indeed, traditional metrics have to do with the size of the audience to which the ads were shown; digital metrics have to do with the actions that users take: e.g. click on an ad, perform a search, share something on social networks, etc. So while the data from traditional versus digital is hard to compare, what if we don’t try to. It makes sense that awareness data deals with the size of the audience -- because the more people who are aware, the greater the sales. This is a top-of-the-funnel metric. Digital data, on the other hand, is more middle-to-lower funnel data. It deals with users taking the action to click on display ads, search for something, or even buy it online. Traditional versus digital data should not be compared -- they apply to different parts of the purchase funnel. Bridging Traditional and Digital ChannelsOnce advertisers realize this difference and no longer try to compare two, then we can start to bridge the gap that divides traditional forms of advertising from digital, where digital is still the “poor stepchild” to the big TV ad budgets. If we use the right data for the right things, then we can think of advertising more holistically -- use awareness-related tactics (traditional) when lack of awareness is the marketing challenge and use engagement and response tactics (digital) when awareness is not the issue. By thinking of digital advertising as advertising and thinking more holistically across channels, marketers can truly achieve Unified Marketing, where the right channel and tactic is chosen to address the right marketing problem. We also need to ensure we don’t apply traditional advertising perspectives to digital and vice versa and therefore ask the wrong questions. For example, asking for reach and frequency in digital is wrong and irrelevant, because digital is about the actions of the users who are making their way down the purchase funnel toward the purchase, not about how far and wide the advertiser casts the net. Asking for the granularity of tracking and metrics in traditional channels is also wrong, not only because it is simply not feasible, but also because traditional channels are about the vastness of the reach. Bringing Big Data to the MainstreamAs companies continue to adopt and use big data for marketing, there are pitfalls that should be known and proactively addressed in order for this analytics business to achieve permanence and the mainstream. For example, when companies attempt to correlate data from different silos -- e.g. offline point of sale data, social media data, Web analytics, etc. -- what is the unique identifier they will use? Will consumers’ personal information, including their name, address, gender, etc. be used? Will simply anonymizing the data be enough? Will the user be able to not only opt-out but also control the flow and use of their personal information? What data would be considered personal, if not my name and address -- the list of sites that I visit, the people I am friends with on Facebook, the searches that I perform on Amazon, my life stream on Twitter? The handling and use of these new types of data needs to be carefully addressed. In a world where consumers’ are more empowered with information and more vocal about demanding their rights, marketers should proactively address these concerns and even err on the side of the user. That will give them access to the right data for the right marketing purpose. --