Online Advertising, Data Sharing, and Consumer Control

Justin P. Johnson, Thomas Jungbauer, M. Preuß
{"title":"Online Advertising, Data Sharing, and Consumer Control","authors":"Justin P. Johnson, Thomas Jungbauer, M. Preuß","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3898798","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We examine how policies for the ownership and control of consumer-generated data affect market outcomes in the online advertising industry. When advertisers have strong property rights over data regarding consumers' active purchase interests, competition between ad exchanges leads to too little sharing of data between advertisers. This harms consumers, who receive too few pertinent ads, and advertisers themselves can also be harmed due to a situation resembling a prisoner's dilemma. We show that giving consumers property rights over their own data can improve outcomes; this happens when consumers can directly share data about their browsing history with ad exchanges. On the other hand, simpler consumer data rights, such as the right to not be tracked, can actually harm consumers due to how ad exchanges respond. Finally, initiatives by Apple and Google to limit third-party tracking, and introduce alternative tracking systems such as FLoCs, can benefit consumers by weakening the property rights of advertisers over consumer data. Because more data is shared by default under such systems, this is true even if these systems are less accurate than the third-party cookie system.","PeriodicalId":423216,"journal":{"name":"Game Theory & Bargaining Theory eJournal","volume":"169 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Game Theory & Bargaining Theory eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3898798","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

We examine how policies for the ownership and control of consumer-generated data affect market outcomes in the online advertising industry. When advertisers have strong property rights over data regarding consumers' active purchase interests, competition between ad exchanges leads to too little sharing of data between advertisers. This harms consumers, who receive too few pertinent ads, and advertisers themselves can also be harmed due to a situation resembling a prisoner's dilemma. We show that giving consumers property rights over their own data can improve outcomes; this happens when consumers can directly share data about their browsing history with ad exchanges. On the other hand, simpler consumer data rights, such as the right to not be tracked, can actually harm consumers due to how ad exchanges respond. Finally, initiatives by Apple and Google to limit third-party tracking, and introduce alternative tracking systems such as FLoCs, can benefit consumers by weakening the property rights of advertisers over consumer data. Because more data is shared by default under such systems, this is true even if these systems are less accurate than the third-party cookie system.
在线广告、数据共享和消费者控制
我们研究了消费者生成数据的所有权和控制政策如何影响在线广告行业的市场结果。当广告商对消费者主动购买兴趣的数据拥有强大的产权时,广告交易所之间的竞争导致广告商之间的数据共享太少。这损害了消费者的利益,因为他们收到的相关广告太少,而广告商自己也会因为类似囚犯困境的情况而受到伤害。我们的研究表明,赋予消费者对自己数据的所有权可以改善结果;当消费者可以直接与广告交易所分享他们的浏览历史数据时,这种情况就会发生。另一方面,更简单的消费者数据权利,如不被跟踪的权利,实际上可能会因为广告交易所的反应而伤害消费者。最后,苹果(Apple)和谷歌(Google)限制第三方追踪的举措,以及引入其他追踪系统(如flock),可以削弱广告商对消费者数据的产权,从而使消费者受益。因为在这样的系统下,默认情况下会共享更多的数据,所以即使这些系统不如第三方cookie系统准确,情况也是如此。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信