Google ‘Delays Making Less Money’ — Third-Party Cookie Ban on Hold
Google’s plan to kill third-party cookies is delayed—yet again. It was going to be this year, then it was pushed back to next year and now we’re told it’ll be 2024 at the earliest.
Remember Google’s FLoC and Topics ideas? They were a big part of what became known as Chrome’s Privacy Sandbox, which would allow for the demise of advertising tracking cookies. The smell of it is that AdTech companies aren’t ready to make the switch.
It’s probably not surprising. In today’s SB Blogwatch, we can’t see Google’s motivation to move fast (or at all).
Your humble blogwatcher curated these bloggy bits for your entertainment. Not to mention: Why our minds crave the supernatural.
AdTech Digs in its Heels
What’s the craic? Abner Li reports—“Google delays [phasing] out third-party cookies to 2024”:
“Covert techniques”
Google was originally planning to get rid of third-party cookies in [Chrome] by 2022, but that was later pushed back to 2023. [The] deadline … is now being delayed to 2024.
…
Citing “consistent feedback” from partners, Google is “expanding the testing windows for the Privacy Sandbox APIs before we disable third-party cookies.” … “Privacy Sandbox trials will expand to millions of users globally” in August.
…
The Privacy Sandbox is Google’s initiative to replace third-party cookies — as well as cross-site tracking identifiers, fingerprinting, and other covert techniques.
What’s the problem? Stephanie Condon ’splains—“Google once again delays phasing out third-party cookies”:
“Track users anonymously”
Google has been working on this for years in response to growing consumer concerns. … Typically, businesses have relied on third-party cookies and data aggregators to assess the behavior of their users across multiple domains. This effort, however … came at the cost of customer privacy.
…
Google’s first attempt to replace the third-party cookie with its own technology, called FLoC, was met with staunch opposition. … Then in January of this year, it rolled out the Topics API, which aims to track users anonymously.
And Garett Sloane has the view from the other side of the fence—“Search giant pushes back timeline”:
“Changing norms around privacy”
The move gives a reprieve to advertisers who rely on the technology to target ads online … a technology that dates back to the foundations of online advertising in the 1990s. … Google is the largest internet advertising company, with a critical role on the buy and sell side of ad tech, serving publishers and advertisers.
…
Apple’s Safari and other browsers have already phased out third-party cookies in the name of privacy. … Apple has been pushing the envelope on anti-tracking features on the Safari web browser and on its devices, as the industry responds to changing norms around privacy.
Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. greenthrow hints at the underlying problem:
Phasing out third party cookies while still maintaining tracking in Chrome for themselves seems like a clear antitrust issue. They are effectively making it harder for any competing ad service to track users without making it any harder for themselves.
Huh? A slightly sweary phantomfive is more blunt:
[It’s a] conflict of interest. ****ing advertisers. They should never have gotten to own the browser.
But has Google done enough to push the AdTech industry? u/NewMediaMogul brings depressing news:
No one is ready for this transition. I am neck deep in this stuff on the buy and sell sides and haven’t run into a single company that is kicking the tires on [Topics].
…
Same goes for integration of first party data. … The replacements aren’t ready for prime time.
What can we do? charles_kaw suggestifies thuswise:
Firefox has done a wonderful job of building first class privacy features into their browser. It’s fast, and responsive. … I switched to it as my main browser a few years back and it’s been fine and hiccup-free.
As does 93 Escort Wagon:
Doesn’t matter to me. I don’t use Chrome and have been blocking third-party cookies for years.
Any other reason to use Firefox? u/cute_as_ducks_24 gets them in a row [You’re fired—Ed.]:
Well it’s the only browser that is not Chromium—except Safari. And other than that Firefox has much better Policies and Extensions. And Chromium usage is alarming because its now the most used browser [with] 90% usage.
…
[It’s a] monopoly, which means Google can effectively change some policies if they want … e.g., let’s say Google decides to ban Adblock extensions. … They can literally change any policies or introduce any changes that might or might not make developers happy.
…
Google will someway or other … make Adblock less effective. … I myself don’t mind proper ads that blend with web content, but now it’s kinda getting out of hand—like literally half of web pages I read are all stuffed with ads that actually affect the usability of the website.
Meanwhile, dcow rewrites the headline for me:
Might as well read “Google delays making less money.” Not surprising at all.
And Finally:
Is “supernatural thinking” a good thing or a bad thing?
TWs: Religion, tambourines, elephants, teleology.
You have been reading SB Blogwatch by Richi Jennings. Richi curates the best bloggy bits, finest forums, and weirdest websites … so you don’t have to. Hate mail may be directed to @RiCHi or [email protected]. Ask your doctor before reading. Your mileage may vary. E&OE. 30.
Image sauce: Vyshnavi Bisani (via Unsplash; leveled and cropped)
