Mobile phone firms plan to find out what you’re talking about . . . and tell advertisers

The Times (U.K.) ^ | October 27, 2007 | Elizabeth Judge

[Stoat]

 

 

Mobile phone firms plan to find out what you’re talking about . . . and tell advertisers

 

Elizabeth Judge

 

Mobile phone companies have drawn up plans to monitor text messages and voice calls and pass the information to advertisers.

Companies such as Motorola have developed technology to scan messages for information about where customers are and what they are doing.

They claim that the service would be used only with customers’ consent. But privacy groups had deep concerns about the technology and the potential for phone companies to abuse it.

Under the Motorola plans, software would be installed on mobile phones to search for related words in text messages. If the words “hungry” and “food” were picked up, for example, an advertisement for a local restaurant could be sent to that user.

 

Kenneth Keller, Motorola’s chief marketing officer, said: “We have a technology which allows us to search, to understand not only where that person might be but also what their interests might be. You figure out if the person is going out for dinner or shopping and trying to find a particular retail outlet, for example.”

The technology is still under development and is currently based around searching text messages, but could also be applied to voice calls, Mr Keller said. Motorola has already started discussions with partners.

Mr Keller conceded that the service would have huge privacy issues in its application. But he said that it would probably be based on an “opt-in” model in which a consumer could sign up in return for cheaper calls.

Simon Davies, director of Privacy International, said: “We have deep concerns about this kind of technology. Phone companies may be talking about ‘opting in’ to such schemes and providing incentives to customers to sign up, but down the line it is more likely you will be penalised if you don’t sign up.”

The Information Commissioner’s Office, which aims to protect personal information, expressed its concerns. A spokesman said that any company scanning text messages and conversations for key words would have to consider their compliance with the Data Protection Act and other laws.

Consumers would have to be fully aware that scanning for the purpose of marketing would be taking place and they would have to consent to it.

“Individuals value their privacy,” the spokesman added.

Advertising via mobile phones has long been regarded as potentially profitable by phone and advertising companies. The appeal lies not only in the huge number of people who use mobile phones but also in the fact that advertisers could reach younger people who may be harder to reach via traditional media. Mobile phones also allow for better targeting of advertisements than traditional media.

Informa Telecoms and Media forecasts that the annual market for advertising on mobile phones will exceed $11 billion (£5.5 billion) by 2011.

Such services have only become viable with the creation of 3G phones with colour screens and fast internet connections. The phone companies have also held back in part because of fears that consumers might complain about intrusive “spam”.

Many phone companies claim that research shows that “opt-in” services — where customers agree to give up personal information and to receive advertisements in return for cheaper calls — will become more viable.

Three weeks ago, the first such service was introduced. Blyk offers customers free airtime minutes if they agree to receive advertisements on their handsets. To receive the service, Blyk customers must first give details of their spending habits and planned purchases on a website. Phone companies believe that the service could be combined with GPS technology — now a feature of many mobile phones — to allow them to identify where a user is and send them advertising.

The Data Protection Act restricts the use of personal data by mobile phone companies. They cannot pass on information to a third party without the consent of that person. But consumer groups fear that the law might not be able to keep up with the technology. Mr Davies said: “Most privacy regulations are about five years behind the technology development cycle.”

Nothing's secret

— In 2005, when cardinals met to elect the new Pope, the Vatican created an electromagnetic force field around them to scupper spies

— The 2003 trial of three men who organised the Real IRA’s bombing campaign in London and Birmingham in 2001 was told how one received a text message showing fizzing sticks of dynamite

— Ian Huntley was convicted of murder after signals from a phone belonging to one of the two girls he killed placed them at his house

— Anti-terror laws introduced last month allow about 700 public bodies and quangos access to mobile phone calls

[Stoat]

The technology is still under development and is currently based around searching text messages, but could also be applied to voice calls, Mr Keller said.

So, if I'm talking with a vet about my pet cat, will I get porn-spammed?

Any carrier that forcibly subjects customers to something like this will instantly find itself listening to the sound of millions of feet....running to a 'clean' carrier......if one exists.

[the invisib1e hand]

yo. i've been saying google was reading your emails ever since I opened a gmail account.

when they announced plans to go into the cellphone biz, well, guess what conclusion I came to about that?

brave-new-world alert. Orwell-alert.

[the invisib1e hand]

......if one exists.

It will. when pigs start speaking latin for real.

Look, the only shot people have against this sh#t is if some smart lawyer can come up with an argument that your personal stuff -- details about you that are unique to you -- your name and personal data, for example -- are copyrightable. Then you can go after these greedy scumbags for royalties.

[ddtorquee]

bump

[padre35]

Well, if one values privacy, it would appear that mobile phones are off the menu...

[Stoat]

i've been saying google was reading your emails ever since I opened a gmail account.

AOL has been one of the leaders in 'privacy mismanagement'.

This FR thread from 2004

AOL is scanning INSIDE your emails, blocking any with unapproved content

[txhurl]

quango alert (whatever that is)

[Stoat]

Well, if one values privacy, it would appear that mobile phones are off the menu...

The string manufacturers will eventually find a way to insert advertising into this type of telephone's transmission system as well   :-(

[2111USMC]

This sounds like a really, really, really, really BAD IDEA!

[Stoat]

quango alert (whatever that is)

a quasi nongovernmental organization; an organization that is financed by the government yet acts independently of the government

WordNet Search - 3.0

quan·go [kwáng g]

(plural quan·gos)

noun

U.K. autonomous government-financed organization: an organization that is able to act independently of the government that finances it

  [Late 20th century. Acronym < quasiautonomous nongovernmental organization]

Microsoft® Encarta® 2007. © 1993-2006 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

 

[the invisib1e hand]

an organization that is able to act independently of the government that finances it

reminds one of "off balance sheet" entities, only with much more diabolical consequences.

Holy accountability-dodge, batman.

[Cailleach]

Does this mean that I could get ads for dairies the next time I send a text message to the hubby telling him to bring home milk?

Sadly, that is about the extent of my texting...lol

[Stoat]

This sounds like a really, really, really, really BAD IDEA!

If my recollection serves, one of the main original selling points of cable TV when it was first being introduced here in the USA was that it would allow customers to watch TV and movies without 'any' advertising.

There isn't cable at the stoat cave, so I have to rely on reports from acquaintances who tell me that there are now lots of commercials on cable TV, although perhaps not quite so many as on 'free' broadcast TV.

It seems that advertising has a history of an initial resistance and then a gradual acceptance by the public, particularly when there isn't anywhere else for the consumer to go.

People cry and moan and make unhappy noises about it but they keep paying their cable bills nonetheless.

[sionnsar]

he said that it would probably be based on an “opt-in” model in which a consumer could sign up in return for cheaper calls.

Jack up the rates, then offer to "reduce" them. Yeah right.

I might buy in though. Gotta work a bit more on that really heavily A-Murrikan-accented Ga\idhlig; doubt their machines can parse that very readily, tha mi' a smaoineachadh. Amadain agus meirleachan!

[the invisib1e hand]

Kenneth Keller, Motorola’s chief marketing officer, said: “We have a technology which allows us to search, to understand not only where that person might be but also what their interests might be.

somebody recently posted something about big business being big government in disguise...here's your "end-run around the constitution."

if they told us they weren't doing it, would there be any basis to trust them? genies don't easily go back into bottles these days.

Orwell's noose is starting to feel a little tight.

[padre35]

Your correct, and Smoke Signals are definetely out of the question in the UK...lol!

Hmm, what if you were smoking a cigarette and talking into one of these phones?

What ad would be sent? One for Marlboros, one for stop smoking medication or would you be arrested on the spot for “Air Wave Second Hand Smoke Health Hazard?”

[dbacks]

Sounds like a ‘story’ for Snopes!

[montag813]

I’m so sure the NSC won’t have any interest in our private calls, right?

[goodnesswins]

Not us....recently downgraded to the plain vanilla “cable” (channels 1-29) for $8/mo....Comcast - for 6 months....I only miss the Cooking Channel and a little of HGTV.

[Stoat]

Sounds like a ‘story’ for Snopes!

Well, in my experience it would be unlike the UK Times to completely fabricate something out of wholecloth.

Twist things, add Leftist spin, only present one side (the Leftist side) of an issue, yes indeed, but I haven't known them to completely make something up......yet.

Furthermore, the technology to monitor specific words in telephone conversations has been around for ages.  The NSA (I think) maintains massive facilities which have been monitoring overseas telephone traffic for decades.  It's been known that they monitor for keywords such as "bomb" "hijack" etc.etc. and since that info was released to the press ages ago, they have probably been monitoring EVERYTHING for just as long   :-)

And of course we all know about the FBI's "Carnivore" system which scans emails.

What's new is the technology being inflicted upon the consumer in the private sector marketplace, in this context of mobile phones.

[Gorzaloon]

AOL has been one of the leaders in 'privacy mismanagement'.

This FR thread from 2004

I think both their remaining users left since that post.

The reason I can safely assume that is because I no longer get the "SEND THIS TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW! (VIRUS ALERT", OR "MODEM TAX" OR "AWAKES TO FIND KIDNEY STOLEN") idiocy.

I mean my filters are _Good_, but they cannot get them all, so it looks like the source has FINALLY curled up and died.

We have not even seen the free skeets they used to hand out, so maybe they are finally gone. I mean officially, though I have not seen any online parties or newsgroup celebrations..

[null and void]

I’m so sure the NSC won’t have any interest in our private calls, right?

Not only that, but if the carrier hears bomb, explosion, allah akbar, and anthrax in the same call [democrat] Congress will pass a law forbidding telling anyone. (Unless they are selling anthrax, chemicals, or korans, of course!}

[Stoat]

Not us....recently downgraded to the plain vanilla “cable” (channels 1-29) for $8/mo....Comcast - for 6 months.

I'm sorry, am I understanding you to say that you're getting commercial-free cable TV  for $8. / month?  Sounds like a good deal.

Are you happy with the service?

...I only miss the Cooking Channel and a little of HGTV.

mmmmmmmmmmm....cooking channel.......mmmmmmmmmmm

 

 

"Cooking gumbo at the stoat cave"

[kalee]

Your brother is the only text message sender/receiver in our household. He learned about texting very quickly upon arriving at college. lol Our phone bill shot up dramatically. Papa had to upgrade the plan.I remain clueless. I can call people and check my messages but that’s the extent of my cell phone knowledge.

[Stoat]

Your correct, and Smoke Signals are definetely out of the question in the UK...lol!

Hmm, what if you were smoking a cigarette and talking into one of these phones?

What ad would be sent? One for Marlboros, one for stop smoking medication or would you be arrested on the spot for “Air Wave Second Hand Smoke Health Hazard?”

And if it could be shown that you were smoking near a Person Of Color, you could be charged with a Hate Crime as well as FCC Health Violations   :-(

Your correct, and Smoke Signals are definetely out of the question in the UK...lol!

Hmm, what if you were smoking a cigarette and talking into one of these phones?

What ad would be sent? One for Marlboros, one for stop smoking medication or would you be arrested on the spot for “Air Wave Second Hand Smoke Health Hazard?”

[goodnesswins]

“commercial free?” HA....no...this is the local stations plus fox Q13 and a few other things....lots of shopping channels....and, one of the CSPAN channels...oh, and Weather, too.....LOL.

[Stoat]

AOL has been one of the leaders in 'privacy mismanagement'.

This FR thread from 2004

I think both their remaining users left since that post.

LMAO!!!  For their sake, I sincerely hope so  :-)

The reason I can safely assume that is because I no longer get the "SEND THIS TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW! (VIRUS ALERT", OR "MODEM TAX" OR "AWAKES TO FIND KIDNEY STOLEN") idiocy.

I mean my filters are _Good_, but they cannot get them all, so it looks like the source has FINALLY curled up and died.

We have not even seen the free skeets they used to hand out, so maybe they are finally gone. I mean officially, though I have not seen any online parties or newsgroup celebrations..

hehe!  I agree, AOL was a horrible conduit for spam and it also served as a magnet for the most non-savvy, obtuse, and technologically-illiterate users on the planet.  I think also that a lot of it has to do with the fact that word has FINALLY gotten around, after years and years and years, that if you have an '@AOL.com" addy you aren't going to be taken seriously   :-)

AOL has been one of the leaders in 'privacy mismanagement'.

This FR thread from 2004

I think both their remaining users left since that post.

LMAO!!!  For their sake, I sincerely hope so  :-)

The reason I can safely assume that is because I no longer get the "SEND THIS TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW! (VIRUS ALERT", OR "MODEM TAX" OR "AWAKES TO FIND KIDNEY STOLEN") idiocy.

I mean my filters are _Good_, but they cannot get them all, so it looks like the source has FINALLY curled up and died.

We have not even seen the free skeets they used to hand out, so maybe they are finally gone. I mean officially, though I have not seen any online parties or newsgroup celebrations..

[Stoat]

“commercial free?” HA....no...this is the local stations plus fox Q13 and a few other things....lots of shopping channels....and, one of the CSPAN channels...oh, and Weather, too.....LOL.

Oh, I see....thank you for the clarification   :-)

I find that I almost never turn on the TV anymore except to watch DVD's, and when there's some natural disaster that's very 'visual'....aside from that I get all my news from the radio and internet.

[Malsua]

I really hate marketing douchebags.

[padre35]

“Man lights cigarette, ends up facing 5 years in prison”

Coming to a newspaper near you..;(

[glorgau]

They claim that the service would be used only with customers’ consent.

And the license to start up the phone will have some sort of phrase like the following, buried down in paragraph 25 subsection e:
"By touching any key or speaking a vowel, you give your consent to XXXX sharing your information with our affiliate partners,"

[Flash Bazbeaux]

“The string manufacturers will eventually find a way to insert advertising into this type of telephone’s transmission system as well”

A friend of Flash’s mother in law, who is from Asia, and is eligible for free government food which she does not like, but would never turn anything down that’s free, sometimes brings it to our house. She asked if we wanted some canned cut vegetables — the kind that taste like boiled water. I told her no, but that I wanted to make a toy telephone for Flash, Jr., and the cans would be just the thing.

Now if I can just get ahold of some government surplus string.

[Stoat]

 

“The string manufacturers will eventually find a way to insert advertising into this type of telephone’s transmission system as well”

A friend of Flash’s mother in law, who is from Asia, and is eligible for free government food which she does not like, but would never turn anything down that’s free, sometimes brings it to our house. She asked if we wanted some canned cut vegetables — the kind that taste like boiled water. I told her no, but that I wanted to make a toy telephone for Flash, Jr., and the cans would be just the thing.

Now if I can just get ahold of some government surplus string.

Perhaps eBay might be worth looking into for both the string as well as additional cans (for a multi-line or party-line configuration) If you can avoid eating those particular canned vegetables it sounds as if it would it would represent an overall quality of life improvement, based upon your description   :-)

 

[Scarchin]

If they offer free service in exchange, I’ll take it. I could give a bleep if someone monitored my conversations.

I suspect I’ll get ads about picking up milk and bread! ;)

[Stoat]

 

If they offer free service in exchange, I’ll take it. I could give a bleep if someone monitored my conversations.

I suspect I’ll get ads about picking up milk and bread! ;)

It might be worth looking into, but if they will be anything at all like the "free" ad-supported internet services, everyone I know who has tried them has given up and gone to a paid ISP, telling me that they are far more trouble than they're worth.  Superslow connectivity, endless crashing, buggy software, endless incompatibilities, etc. etc. etc.

Imagine, if you will, that you are driving to the neighborhood MegaMarket and you get a call on your 'free' ad-supported cell phone.  Because you're a super-safe and scrupulously legal driver who would never even consider talking on the phone while you drive, you pull over to the side of the road because you are thinking that it might be a call from Mrs. Scarchin who is wanting to update the grocery list that she handed you as you walked out the door. Instead, it's a recorded ad which locks the control circuitry on the phone to prevent you from hanging up on the call.  Unable to cancel the LOUD ad and frustrated that you will now have to spend fifteen minutes getting back onto the Interstate again because the traffic is so bad, something that you wouldn't have had to do if you hadn't received the call, you angrily throw the phone out the window of the car.

Just as you do this, a police car is passing by your vehicle, and it has it's window open.  Of course, the still-jabbering "free" cellphone flies into the patrol car and strikes the officer in the eye, causing him to angrily stop and activate his overhead lights.  He violently pulls you out of your car despite your apologies and slams your head down on the hood, breaking your nose and several front teeth.  You're arrested for "assaulting a police officer" and are thrown into a particularly unpleasant jail cell.                

Because the family car was impounded, Mrs. Scarchin has to take a taxi downtown to bail you out, and she is none too pleased.

So, when considering a "free" cellphone, it's a very good idea to consider the potential downsides of the venture   :-)