Google Remarketing Ads Found To Violate Canadian Privacy Law; To Revamp Ad Review System By June

Google has agreed to several concessions after an investigation by Canada’s Office of the Privacy Commissioner found Google in violation of Canada’s privacy rights for the use of sensitive health history in remarketing campaigns.
The investigation began last January, when a man complained that his personal health history was being used for ad targeting purposes.  After searching for and visiting sites related to medical devices for sleep apnea, he was retargeted with display ads for those devices when he browsed the web.
The Commissioner’s office has agreed with the man that Google unlawfully used sensitive health information for ad targeting purposes. It is inappropriate for this type of information to be used in online behavioural advertising,” says Interim Privacy Commissioner Chantal Bernier. Adding, “As Canadians spend more and more time online, they create a digital trail that can reveal a great deal about a person.  Organizations such as Google must ensure privacy rights are respected in this complex environment.”
Two years ago the Office of the Privacy Commissioner issued guidelines around online behavioral advertising (OBA) as it relates to the Personal Information and Electronic Documents Act (PIPEDA). Ad targeting based on health, financial information or other interests that are considered “sensitive” is prohibited.
Google’s own privacy policy states it “will not associate sensitive interest categories with your cookie (such as those based on race, religion, sexual orientation, health, or sensitive financial categories) and will not use these categories when showing you interest-based ads”.
In its response to the Commissioner’s office during the inquiry Google blamed advertisers for not following the policies,

Google stated that remarketing criteria and user lists are determined by the advertiser directly. Google requires all advertisers using this platform to agree to specific policies, which prohibit all forms of interest based advertising involving sensitive categories, including the use of user lists based on “health or medical information”.  According to Google, it is up to each remarketer to determine the application of Google’s policies to any proposed remarketing. Google indicated that, despite its policies and guidance, certain advertisers or third party buyers can use remarketing products in error.
When an advertiser uses Google’s system to set up remarketing, there is a reminder to advertisers: “review the remarketing program policy to find out what you need to include in your site’s privacy policy, and which sensitive categories of sites can’t use this feature” (with a link to the policy provided).

Google also provided detailed information on how it monitors ads and advertisers to prevent abuses. Canada’s privacy office found the monitoring tools “were not scalable and had demonstrable shortcomings,” and made recommendations for developing a “more formalized and rigorous system for reviewing advertisements and addressing instances of non-compliance.”
As a result, Google said it will upgrade its automated review systems by June 2014.
Additionally, Google says it has rejected all active retargeting campaigns involving CPAP devices and has increased searches of active retargeting campaigns potentially related to sensitive interest categories.
The move will likely impact a wide swath of advertisers running retargeting campaigns. Steve Cameron of Advent Communications in the UK discovered that Google deactivated remarketing lists for a cancer facility client in which members of the lists were located in Canada as a result of the ruling.
It remains unclear if Google will adopt this new level of stringency across the board when it revamps its automated ad review platform.
Meanwhile, Canada isn’t stopping with Google. Interim Privacy Commissioner Chantal Bernier added in a statement, “We also have concerns about whether other advertising networks are complying with Canadian privacy law.  We will be contacting various advertising stakeholders in the near future to share these investigation results and remind them of their privacy obligations.”
Related Topics: Channel: Display | Google | Google: AdWords | Google: Legal | Google: Privacy | Legal | Legal: Privacy | Top News About The Author: Ginny Marvin writes about paid online marketing topics including paid search, paid social, display and retargeting. Beyond Search Engine Land, Ginny provides search marketing and demand generation advice for ecommerce companies. She can be found on Twitter as @ginnymarvin. See more articles by Ginny MarvinConnect with the author via: Email | Twitter
View the original article here

Matt Cutts: “Stick A Fork In It, Guest Blogging Is Done”

Google — and Matt Cutts, in particular — has made a number of statements about guest blogging over the past year as the tactic has grown as a link building tactic.
None of those statements are as clear as the one Cutts wrote today on his personal blog.
Cutts, the head of Google’s webspam team, says that he’d “expect Google’s webspam team to take a pretty dim view of guest blogging going forward.”
He begins the post with a very clear message:

Okay, I’m calling it: if you’re using guest blogging as a way to gain links in 2014, you should probably stop. Why? Because over time it’s become a more and more spammy practice, and if you’re doing a lot of guest blogging then you’re hanging out with really bad company.

After sharing an example of a guest blogging solicitation he received that would violate Google’s quality guidelines, Cutts says guest blogging is dead as a linkbuilding tactic:

So stick a fork in it: guest blogging is done; it’s just gotten too spammy. In general I wouldn’t recommend accepting a guest blog post unless you are willing to vouch for someone personally or know them well. Likewise, I wouldn’t recommend relying on guest posting, guest blogging sites, or guest blogging SEO as a linkbuilding strategy.

As I said above, this isn’t the first time Google or Cutts has discussed the risks of guest blogging. It’s just the most clear and definitive statement of all. You can see how Google’s stance toward the tactic has changed over time:
You can plainly see how the messaging has progressed from “better nofollow the links” to “use moderation” to “guest blog spam is getting bad” and now to today’s “stick a fork in it” post.
Google and Cutts have warned on things like this before — consider this warning about content farms that was published about one month before the Panda update rolled out.
The question now becomes: Is Google planning an algorithmic update that would impact guest blogging to coincide with today’s warning?
Related Topics: Channel: SEO | Google: SEO | Top News About The Author: Matt McGee is Editor-In-Chief of Search Engine Land. His news career includes time spent in TV, radio, and print journalism. His web career continues to include a small number of SEO and social media consulting clients, as well as regular speaking engagements at marketing events around the U.S. He recently launched a site dedicated to Google Glass called Glass Almanac and also blogs at Small Business Search Marketing. Matt can be found on Twitter at @MattMcGee and/or on Google Plus. You can read Matt's disclosures on his personal blog. See more articles by Matt McGeeConnect with the author via: Email | Twitter | Google+ | LinkedIn
View the original article here