Rules for thee, not for me: Our take on the MRC Digital Auction Transparency Standards proposal

Through our work on the Google adtech antitrust trial, we've talked a lot about the stranglehold that Google has on the digital ad industry. But, Google doesn't just control the tools that are used to buy and sell ads. Google, along with other big players, exert significant influence over the self-regulatory bodies that are supposed to set standards for the industry. That's why on Monday, October 20, we submitted formal comments on the Media Rating Council’s (MRC) proposed Digital Advertising Auction Transparency Standards. While MRC says these standards are supposed to make digital advertising auctions more transparent to advertisers and publishers, as written, they risk legitimizing opacity and cementing a double-standard that favors big tech.

Our public submission highlights that the proposed new standard would allow "MRC members to craft, vote on, and potentially be accredited under the same framework.” It’s like having restaurant owners set the rules for their own health inspections, and decide whether to give themselves an “A.”

In our comment, we outline enhancements, concerns, and our callouts to the MRC to not only strengthen the standards, but also to address these conflicts of interest in its model. “When those being accredited are writing the rules, independence is a fiction,” said Iesha White, our Director of Intelligence.

We have questions! They'll have answers

Our push for Know-Your-Customer (KYC) rules for adtech is gaining a ton of momentum! We are proud to have supported Member of European Parliament, Andreas Schwab, in drafting questions to the European Commission, titled “Strengthening transparency and accountability in the digital advertising sector through registration and oversight of adtech intermediaries.” In his question, he asks the Commission whether existing laws like the Digital Markets Act have been effective in advancing adtech transparency and accountability, and whether current frameworks can be adapted to introduce Know-Your-Customer requirements and disclosure of beneficial ownership, mirroring requirements in the financial services and telecommunication sectors. We are eager to hear from the EC and have more insight into how governments can use or enhance existing tools to hold adtech accountable.

The sunny state put up a fight for privacy and won!

This month, California passed numerous tech-focused bills. We are celebrating the passage of three in particular – A.B. 656, A.B. 556, and SB 361. These are big wins for users' right to privacy, and align with our advocacy for policies that promote data minimization, universal opt-out mechanisms, and stronger protections for sensitive data.

Our work in coalition with Consumer Reports in support of A.B. 566 matters because people deserve clarity and ease to opt out of their data being used.

Here’s a quick breakdown of what each bill does:

• A.B. 566 — Opt-Out Act: This will make it significantly easier for Californians to exercise control over their personal data.

  Requires browsers to include an easy-to-locate and use setting that would send an opt-out preference signal. This makes opting out practical, rather than forcing users to express this preference to each and every one of the potential hundreds or even thousands of businesses they interact with — including lesser-known adtech companies and data brokers that work behind the scenes

• A.B. 656 — account deletion made simple (and permanent), without all the fluff

  How many hoops are too many hoops to jump through when trying to cancel your social media account? We say more than one! A.B. 566 prevents companies from using any deceptive tactics (what we in the biz call "dark patterns") to make this action difficult!

• SB 361 — Data broker transparency: This expands the disclosures that data brokers need to make about the types of data that they collect and who they sell or share it with. For example, they will need to disclose whether they collect Mobile advertising IDs, and whether they have shared or sold data with law enforcement or foreign actors.

The adtech business model has been built on a foundation of pervasive tracking and data extraction. This is why these wins are California are so crucial – they are a landmark step for consumers to have control of their own data, and for businesses to have a fair shot at advertising by reaching real people, and not relying on the false promise of low-quality data signals.

Do you want to see privacy protections like these in your state? Call your state congressional representative and request that they consider introducing a bill like A.B. 566 in your state congress.

 

Love,

The Check My Ads Team