Apple considers delay of iOS 14 privacy feature after ad industry backlash
Apple has reportedly told some developers that it plans to delay the enforcement of an iOS 14 privacy feature that has stirred controversy among advertisers and publishers.
Credit: Apple
The iOS 14 feature would require that users opt-in to aggregate ad tracking on an app-by-app basis. Companies that rely on advertising, from Facebook to news publishers, have raised concerns that it could significantly reduce ad revenue.
In the wake of those concerns, The Information on Thursday reported that Apple has told some developers that it plans to delay the enforcement of the pro-privacy feature.
The feature in question concerns Identifier for Advertisers (IDFA), a random device identifier that allows advertisers to track aggregate data on users without revealing identifiable information.
In iOS 14, Apple will require users to specifically tap a prompt to "allow tracking" across apps and websites owned by other companies. That data allows advertisers to target personalized ads toward users, though many experts and ad industry officials believe that most users will opt out when faced with the prompt.
According to The Information's report, a delay in enforcement could mean that users won't see the prompt for some time after installing iOS 14 on their devices. Instead, the opt-in feature could arrive sometime in 2021.
Although positioned a pro-privacy endeavor, the feature has drawn ire from European ad officials and other tech giants like Facebook.
Facebook, for example, has said that the feature could lead to a 50% drop in advertising revenue on iPhone and iPad. Digital news publishers and media outlets are also "bracing" for a sizable drop in ad revenue, since advertisers pay less for ads that aren't personalized ads.
Credit: Apple
The iOS 14 feature would require that users opt-in to aggregate ad tracking on an app-by-app basis. Companies that rely on advertising, from Facebook to news publishers, have raised concerns that it could significantly reduce ad revenue.
In the wake of those concerns, The Information on Thursday reported that Apple has told some developers that it plans to delay the enforcement of the pro-privacy feature.
The feature in question concerns Identifier for Advertisers (IDFA), a random device identifier that allows advertisers to track aggregate data on users without revealing identifiable information.
In iOS 14, Apple will require users to specifically tap a prompt to "allow tracking" across apps and websites owned by other companies. That data allows advertisers to target personalized ads toward users, though many experts and ad industry officials believe that most users will opt out when faced with the prompt.
According to The Information's report, a delay in enforcement could mean that users won't see the prompt for some time after installing iOS 14 on their devices. Instead, the opt-in feature could arrive sometime in 2021.
Although positioned a pro-privacy endeavor, the feature has drawn ire from European ad officials and other tech giants like Facebook.
Facebook, for example, has said that the feature could lead to a 50% drop in advertising revenue on iPhone and iPad. Digital news publishers and media outlets are also "bracing" for a sizable drop in ad revenue, since advertisers pay less for ads that aren't personalized ads.
Comments
This was one of the primary features I was waiting for in iOS 14! Hopefully it’s still in there and I can still block these fucking goons from collecting petabytes of data on me and others!!!
And besides, why give a damn? Regulatory and antitrust pressures are here to stay, at least in the foreseeable future. There is no “incentive” in “playing nice” with other sectors of the technology industry.
But most importantly: this move doesn’t resonate with Apple’s values, such as they are recognized. Nor does it makes sense for Apple’s consumers.
"We believe technology should protect users’ fundamental right to privacy, and that means giving users tools to understand which apps and websites may be sharing their data with other companies for advertising or advertising measurement purposes, as well as the tools to revoke permission for this tracking. When enabled, a system prompt will give users the ability to allow or reject that tracking on an app-by-app basis. We want to give developers the time they need to make the necessary changes, and as a result, the requirement to use this tracking permission will go into effect early next year." - Apple
Ironic this gets released on the same day an ad get's released touting their privacy stance.
This is not a reduction of privacy for normal users, only for beta users and only for a short amount of time.
The battles with Epic and regulators weakened Apple. Apple cannot fight all sides, and every battle at once.
I don’t mind to pay for service if it is good and reasonable price. But this is not what most people think.
I am running iOS 14 beta now. I don’t usually use beta OS. But the block ad tracking function alone worth it. If apple actually remove the function, it will be a big disappointment, given it is the biggest selling point for 14.
I have often wondered, if Facebook decided to charge for an ad/tracking-free experience 1) how much would it need to be for them to cover what they earn per user per month and 2) how many people would switch to the paid model? My guess is there are not a lot of people who would be willing to pay to use Facebook, especially if it was more than $1/month. My other guess is that most people who are currently using Facebook don’t really care about ads and tracking.
It's become impossible to visit a web site and search for a product w/o having a bot, ad or tracking warning pop up and take my cursor focus away.
To Marketing...it's not helpful...it's annoying!!!!!!!!!!
(No affiliation etc, and so on.)
They were never forced to work this way, it was just easier than making a product that people actually would be willing to pay for.
For example, many apps could be made to work in either offline mode or mostly decentralised; which would make it a lot cheaper to run the services (no backend constantly eating up resources when the apps are used). But the apps end up intentionally "crippled" and heavily reliant on a backend, simply because the developers designed the whole thing to not provide a service; they developed it to grab people's data, and to keep their attention for ads.
So they were never forced to work this way, they intentionally worked this way because there were sheep that were easy targets because the OS didn't offer enough protection.