Thread · 9 tweets · 16 Oct 2020

First, it’s good for people. The TCF was designed to support the existing status quo in real-time bidding (RTB). RTB is a data free-for-all that operates with complete disregard for the safety and privacy of individuals. We can fix this! But this requires putting people first.
↺ 2
Second, it’s good for publishers. Broadcasting personal data also means broadcasting audience data. In turn, this leads to devalued audiences and lower revenue since the adtech companies in the RTB system can target high-value news audiences without paying news outlets.
↺ 2
Third, it’s good for adtech. The adtech world has become hooked on “consent”. But people simply cannot genuinely consent to such complexity at such scale. It’s just a legal fiction. The TCF is just about protecting the status quo; but what adtech needs is innovation.
↺ 2
The adtech industry is having its lunch eaten by Google. In my humble opinion, that’s from trying to beat Google in a race to the bottom. Trying to be less mindful of privacy and a free, independent press than Google, at greater scale and faster, isn’t really doable.
↺ 2
Which brings me to the final point: finding the TCF out of line with GDPR is a good decision, but Google’s bidding system is no better and its lack of purpose limitation is staggering. It would be unfair for regulators to enforce on only part of the market. 🔚
↺ 3