Computers, Cowboys and Commissions

The Federal Trade Commission is encroaching into monitoring spyware activities on the Internet. Last week the Chairman of the FCC gave us a three tiered Internet, and this week it's FTC involvement. Advertisers who track with spyware are known to sell the information that they gather on individual Internet users explains Jon Leibowitz.

Leibowitz, Chairman of the FTC, explains the following:

"Now, what we have called for is the ability of consumers to be able to opt out of that kind of third-party cookie tracking."

As if the Internet can't be self governing at "8,000" days old, the implied message from the FTC Chairman is subtle.

What Jon Leibowitz says is that he prefers that actions be voluntary concerning spyware. Agreed. The U.S. government is top heavy already.

He goes on with more explanations of how the Internet works.

Cookies may be spyware, but in their most useful capacity, they are a tool to recognize users who have registered at a website. Other useful applications for cookies are for shoppers who want to be notified of sales on items they are interested in, explains the knowledgeable FTC chairman

Evidently, the problems are that cookies are collected for the resale of an individual's interests and shopping habits. This could lead to more abundant and unwanted advertising.

So, do we opt out of such programs on an individual basis?

No. Google Chrome already offers an incognito feature. Though it hasn't been very obvious, it might be enough to keep government at bay. The honorable chairman would like to see incognito offerings become more obvious.

Some of Leibowitz' cohorts have the opinion that Internet Marketing will take a nose dive. Arguments are already echoing throughout Capital Hill.

Aren't Internet shoppers quite able to keep track of their own favorite places to shop?

The notion that Internet economy would be hurt by allowing consumers the privacy that they have a right to is poppycock. Still, that's what some folks on Capital Hill are saying.

Instead of cookies, advertising might become more generic. Murmurings are that all inclusive ads, instead of targeted ads, would increase advertising all together.

Another anticipated outcome is the use of annoying pop ups, because these are as generic as advertising can get. They operate completely independently of any information about shopper's preferences.

Clicking the X on a pop up is actually an invitation for it to come back, again and again and again. Business people in the millisecond world don't want to take the time to erase obstacles to get to where they are going.

What would government overreaching into Internet affairs be like? Here's one scenario:

Imagine a cowboy movie about settling the Wild West. Take famed cowboy Matt Dillon for example. During his first days as the new sheriff, he swaggers around Dodge City with his new shiny badge glistening in the sun.

He's just letting people know that he's around. His macho posturing makes the statement that he's ready to enforce the law.

Is the Internet like a Dodge City? Will the setting sun bring the long shadow of the law into the picture? Will there be shoot outs in the middle of the road (Congess)?

The internet is twenty some years old. At this point, government intervention is a scary proposition. Restricting spyware cookies through government intervention opens to the door to more governing - ugh.