visit
Facebook has already been embroiled in many controversies, including discussing fair compensation for their moderators and their impact on politics. When it comes to Apple, the source of the two firm's simmering tension has been largely attributed to opposed approaches to data protection.
For years, Apple has positioned itself as the gatekeeper to its users' data. The company believes that if users are essential to the product, they need to control their data. Meanwhile, Facebook argues that it stands for small businesses, empowering firms to better grow their communities through the data they collect. Should Apple's proposed update make it to devices, the ability of app developers (including everything from mobile games to video conferencing software) to retain, businesses and users would be severely curtailed.Apple's proposed Spring update, iOS 14, has been the cause for the recent escalation in hostilities, with one feature, in particular, raising developer's ire: App Tracking Transparency (ATT).
ATT will require app developers to solicit users' permission to track their movements across the web. The change could cost Google and Facebook $25 billion over the next few months. As it stands, should users navigate away from any app to search for anything from obscure subjects like top business phone systems or common cloud security mistakes to Reddit, the developer in question can still harvest that data to better target their adverts? Facebook specifically is looking to launch an antitrust lawsuit in retaliation. Ironically, Facebook's most recent volley will be launched just as Apple's antitrust suit in South Korea ends. The company's head of ads, Dan Levy, portrayed Apple's latest move as an attempt to create "anti-personalized advertising … trying to take the world back 10 or 20 years."Whilst this lawsuit is likely to drag through judicial purgatory, there are immediate questions for the more advertisers who rely on the data provided by app developers. Chiefly: how will my business be impacted?The implications ATT will have on audience segmentation are already clear: no device-based ID means a limited grouping of users into relevant categories and demographics.
However, there are more wide-reaching and immediate problems for advertisers, chiefly the resulting lack of geographic location data. Currently, Apple enables users to turn on and off which apps have access to their exact location. Most phones, at the very least, allow for the geographic location to be turned on and off entirely. Under ATT, users will have the option of deciding whether apps like Facebook can gain access to their exact location. Should the user decline, only approximate geolocation information is distributed to app owners. Whilst advertisers can therefore tailor their market to individuals' rough location. It does rule out a few other modes of advertisement. It may not impact digital retailers like cloud-based workforce management providers. Brick and mortar stores are directly implicated. This can be a detrimental blow for a business' efforts to reduce customer churn.Currently, retailers can place beacons across multiple aisles that send offers to consumers as they browse. For a flailing retail sector trying to keep pace with ecommerce, this change removes yet another means of competition. Ultimately, the divide between privacy and marketing will continue to be navigated for years to come. However, companies today can and should object to the longevity of their businesses being compromised by two of technologies' biggest companies.