Privacy watchdogs have thoroughly sniffed the Google-DoubleClick deal and they're barking up a storm about the potential for the abuse of your and my personal info. (A point also raised in this space last week.) A trio of organizations lead by the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) have asked the FTC to block the merger until GoogleClick/DoubleGoo can guarantee users' privacy.
DoubleClick says the information it collects via its ad network belongs entirely to its clients, so there's nothing to worry about. But the real gold lies in the clickstream -- the pattern that emerges as you hop from one site to the next on the DoubleClick ad network. Behavioral advertising companies use this information to display ads based on where you've been and what you've clicked on. Combine that clickstream data with all the other information Google has about your search history, blog entries, email, etc, and pretty soon Google knows more about you than your mother does.
What Google does with this information is one question. The bigger question is what other folks will be able to do with it once Google has collected it. Say, for example, an insurance company is looking for evidence that you're faking a claim, or a nasty divorce attorney is digging for dirt, or you have a government that's fiercely protective of its own privacy but doesn't give a damn about anyone else's. Without a way to anonymize this data, it could soon be raining subpoenas in Mountain View.
Cringesters who've emailed me are nearly unanimous in their wariness over the deal. K.M. writes:
I don't have anything Google on my computer any longer, nor do I use it for search any more. The deciding factor for me was the day I saw the "Do no evil" policy in action. I think it works like this: "If it's bad for Google it is evil, to hell with everyone else." I wouldn't let a government I like keep as much information about me as Google would keep.
Reader B.M. does a dead-on Mr. Bill impersonation:
Noooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The positive luster of Google has begun to fall! Upon conclusion of this sale I will begin to search for Google product replacements. I will not support DoubleClick.
Cringester J.G. wonders where DoubleClick ends and Google begins:
Purely as a Web surfer I have forever blocked every attempt DoubleClick makes to force feed cookies and fatten me up for a kill. At the same time I have used, and continue to use many of Google's features. Now with this do I block also Google, or do I hypocritize [sic] and use the one and block the other?
However, D.S. hopes Google's vaunted geek cred will improve matters:
If Google proves only to be no more evil with respect to DoubleClick-related activities than DoubleClick was as an independent, then one might at least expect improved response times when fetching Web pages that include DoubleClick links. ... I'd expect Google to apply its server might and distribution to improving this situation. One can hope, anyhow.
I think EPIC et al are right to pose the question. Now it's Google's turn to come up with a really good answer.
Got hot tips or strong opinions about Googleclick/DoubleGoo? Send me a discreet note here or post your comments below. Top tipsters will receive a confidential Cringe bag.