'Do Not Track' plan protects privacy on the Wild West Web

When you go online, marketers track your every move. This can include which sites you visit, what you buy and which search words you use — all so advertisers can target their pitches. The effect is a little like being on the wrong side of a one-way mirror, or being spied on by that little camera built into your monitor.

For this reason, the Federal Trade Commission, creator of the wildly successful National Do Not Call Registry that prevents telemarketers from disrupting your dinner, has come up with a proposal for a "Do Not Track" system. It would let you opt out of such tracking, probably by enabling a feature on your Web browser. While the proposal raises some technical issues, and much is still unknown about how it would work, it is well worth pursuing.

Most consumers do not want to be watched, period. A 2009 survey, conducted by universities in Pennsylvania and California, found that two-thirds of respondents opposed tracking. A more recent poll, by the non-profit Consumer Watchdog group, found that 80% liked the idea of a Do Not Track registry administered by the government.

While there might be nothing inherently wrong with a system that exposes a lawyer, for example, to ads for pricey suits rather than for surgical equipment, it does not account for the fact that she never agreed to have her buying habits monitored in the first place.

Perhaps she has decided that she needs to economize and does not want advertisers to target her. Or perhaps she is uncomfortable with having to trust anonymous data collectors not to sell her information beyond the online advertising market.

With some modest detective work, data collected online can be linked with names and used in connection with employment, housing or health insurance. An employer, for instance, could go well beyond a typical search of what a potential employee might have posted to see whether he or she visits pornography or gambling sites, or has medical issues. This is not forbidden under current law, which allows much of the Internet to operate like the Wild West.

Not surprisingly, online advertisers are dead set against the Do Not Track idea. They believe that they are doing the world a great favor by targeting their ads so people don't have to see pitches for products and services they have no use for. The advertisers also argue that the same tracking that leads to targeted ads also helps people get access to information about sports, hobbies or other interests. They are apparently not aware of Google, or of other powerful search and networking tools that help people find the products and information they want, when they want it.

To be sure, the Do Not Track proposal presents myriad technical issues. One is that the opt-out mechanism might be a tracking device of its own, a "cookie" like those used to store passwords or save certain settings. Another is that the FTC could find it difficult to enforce the measure, particularly if data are being gathered by shady offshore companies.

At this point, however, these seem to be at least as much excuses made by opponents of the plan as legitimate roadblocks. The Do Not Call Registry might be the most popular thing the federal government has done in decades. It's time for an online encore.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/ed ... 7_ST_N.htm