Large data has a prerequisite: the data obtained is legal

Abstract: Precision marketing should be divided into two kinds, one is based on social attributes, one is based on interest. The so-called social attribute, is roughly sex, age, education level, income status, and so on, a lot of precision marketing is actually this category. And based on a wide range of interests

Precision marketing should be divided into two categories, one based on social attributes, one based on interest. The so-called social attribute, is roughly sex, age, education level, income status, and so on, a lot of precision marketing is actually this category. And based on interest ads, the most typical example is the search engine keyword ads. Basically, search engines don't need to know about your social attributes, but they can also match ads that have something to do with your interest. You must have been interested in searching for the tablet computer.

In terms of advertising accuracy, advertising based on social attributes is not as accurate as it says, and the reason is that social attributes and interests are not the same thing. I am a weekday even lazy to go people, even if the monthly income can buy 10 pairs of a certain brand of sports shoes, the brand of advertising is not very useful to me. And a need for several months to accumulate the cost of living to buy a pair of college students, advertising may not have no effect: because this person super love sports.

But the ads based on interest is very difficult, and it has to do with the point of time, this student just spent a few months to buy a pair of living expenses, then the advertising effect will be greatly reduced. As far as the Internet is concerned, accurate advertising based on interest is now only capable of large-scale operation of search engines, and the degree of interest matching is not necessarily very high. So marketers have focused on social attributes. But it is not easy for people to contribute to their own pile of attributes: People are fine. Why should I tell you this? So, there is the CCTV 315 of this year's attack on the scene: The theft of user privacy.

Getting user information (in most cases privacy) is a very technical matter, the General people do not understand, but how to obtain is legitimate, not so technical and complex. My opinion on two: 1, the user voluntarily will give this information to you; 2, whether the user voluntarily will give this information to you and then agreed to let you to the third party.

CCTV 315 Party mentioned a portal mailbox, the portal staff said we can see your mail, this is not enough for the letter, may be exaggerated, even if it is true, the evidence is not enough, an ordinary outreach staff, is unlikely to know the technical details behind. But it's true that the email service provider analyzes your email (this is different from seeing your email), there was a lot of controversy behind Gmail, but the controversy was later quelled because it was a machine-scan analysis and a machine to match the ads.

This part is related to the first article I said, you provide the mailbox service provider your information (including the content of the mail), it can be analyzed and analyzed? That depends on the terms of service. You can say these Terms of service is very bully, but considering that people are free to provide you, in exchange for a little advertising fee also has a certain "legitimacy." The key red line is here: It has not been transferred to a third party. CCTV 315 Dozen This part, basically belong to the wrong.

But some online advertising companies are frequently claiming to hold hundreds of millions of of the user's cookies, and this part is largely correct. Because this part is related to the second article I said: Will users voluntarily give their information to a third party?

Cookies are meant to make it easier for users to interact with the site, but cookies should not allow company A to get cookies from company B. Just imagine that Sina Weibo and Tencent Weibo can read cookies to each other, which is a mess. But the network advertising company through the deployment of code, access to the user a company portal information, is clearly contrary to the second: users should not know and should be able to infer the reluctance. This standard is not really related to technology, imagine any one of the steps to apply for a credit card to fill out details can not be detailed information, but no one will allow the bank to send this information to the supermarket at home (that is, joint card).

Network advertising companies want to deploy code on the portal site, which is almost impossible without the latter's permission. It does exist that both sides are suspected of doing some work under the table on their backs. Such things have happened in the United States, for example, when Facebook encountered a user suing it to hand over information to a third party advertising agency, and the settlement was: 10 million dollars.

Nowadays, the concept of large data is very popular, but there is a prerequisite for large data: Data acquisition is legitimate, and the use of data is legitimate. I thought, a network service company takes the user to it the information or the text is good, makes the ponder, desperately digs, does not have too many improper, because actually it obtains once the user's permission. The next step is to string up the need for complementarity, still have to go through a permit. Precision marketing is necessarily the use of privacy information to make a fuss, but without permission that is called "Invasion of privacy."

The consequences should be serious.