Posted by Andrew Edwards on December 14th, 2010 at 3:42 pm

Now the furor over privacy goes global. With the advent of Assange and crew, the subject of privacy itself no longer has any. The world seems divided between those calling his work terrorism, and those championing him in the name of transparency (especially as it relates to use of our tax dollars).

And as digital marketers, we are now forced to reckon with new scrutiny about the collection and use of on line data (better known as web analytics) in general. In the past we had those whom I call "privacy zealots" claiming that targeted advertising based on usage was equivalent to Walmart putting a billboard in your front yard. And the more reasonable among us said, "no, its more like if you went to Walmart and found some ads for Walmart tucked into your shopping bag." I don't work for Walmart but I do occasionally shop there, and I am entirely neutral on the subject of the great big box store itself. But I count myself among the latter respondents to the question of privacy.

Reasonable privacy concerns formulate requests like: don't take my PII and let bad people do bad things with it; and at some point, learn that you are annoying me by showing me the same product I didn't want to buy when I was at that site ('cause I'm not buyin' it now either).

Unreasonable privacy concerns formulate demands like: I want to come into your store wearing a cloak of invisibility, poke around, stay as long as I like, and you should not even know I visited.

Congress is again taking up the issue of privacy in measurement. Will it be influenced by the avalanche of sensitive data released by Mr. Assange and his associates? Unfortunately, I believe it will be. Also, we can count on privacy zealots once again to strike up the band and play the "no measurement b/c its dangerous" tune until everyone is very tired of hearing it.

Reasonable site-users are comfortable with the notion that content providers have a right to know what is being done by visitors to their sites. Will the Wikileaks juggernaut cause them to withdraw their support for site-tracking?

With evident hysteria in play when the subject is raised, it is not a remote possibility that we could see some blowback both on the consumer side and on the legislative side.

In the end, there really is just one choice: an analyzed, free internet experience, or a paid one. Or, of course, we could end up simply with vast amounts of one-off, primitive sites made by content providers who have little to offer and little reason to understand their users. Kind of like 1996?

But there is a critical difference between the notion of privacy as it is presented by Wikileaks, and the notion of privacy as it relates to site usage. And as digital marketers, we should make sure (regardless of how we feel about Assange et al) we are shouting it from the rooftops.

Whatever our opinion about the boon or blowup caused by knowing that the Secretary of State ordered diplomats to spy on other diplomats, we must make clear that Wikileaks obtained information improperly; by taking files they were never supposed to have; and setting the information free.

Whatever web analytics is, it is not that. Our task, and it must be a serious one, is to gather user data carefully, and devote the knowledge we gain entirely to the task of creating a more satisfying on line experience for those whose behavior gave us the data. We should redouble our efforts to make sure that data is not wikileaked.

Wikileaks has created a new round of hysteria about privacy--for good or ill, that is not for me to say--but it helps to know how to differentiate from what has made privacy a scary topic. At some point we will need to make sure that distinction is clear and well understood.