Personalized Ad in Your Google Glass? Wearable Technology, Hands-Off Data Collection, and New Policy Imperative
This study analyzes the increasing presence and capabilities of wearable computing devices in the cornucopia of personalized digital data. We argue that the institutional data practices typical of Google Glass will pose policy challenges and herald yet another dramatic shift to personalized data marketing. We also highlight the characteristics of Google’s existing synergetic data practices that will shape the development of not only Google Glass, but also all subsequent wearable mobile devices in light of 360-degree data collection. The key organizing concept of our study is the disjuncture between (1) institutional and (2) policy forces in harnessing dual market mechanism, which frames how the new communication industry operates in the marketplace of ubiquitous personal advertising. We conclude by summarizing the three key areas of political-policy concern (privacy; anti-trust; and user competence) and suggest future solutions, with the discussion on the future of wearable computing practices related to the freedom of the human body.
KeywordsDatabase-marketing surveillance Wearable technology Personalization Privacy Algorithm-based business model New media policy
- Brin, S., & Page, L. (1998). The anatomy of a large-scale hypertextual Web search engine. In Proceedings of the seventh international conference on World Wide Web (pp. 107–117), 14–18 April 1998, Brisbane, Australia.Google Scholar
- Campbell, A. J. (1998). Self-regulation and the media. Federal Communications Law Journal, 51, 711.Google Scholar
- Davidoff, S. (2013, June 18). Google’s effort to skirt regulation may invite more scrutiny. The New York Times, p. B9.Google Scholar
- Economist. (2010, February 25). Data, data everywhere. Special Report: Managing Information. Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/node/15557443?story_id=15557443.
- Fallows, D. (2005). Search engine users: Internet users are very positive about their online search experiences. Pew Research Internet Project, January 23, 2005.Google Scholar
- FTC. (1999). Self-regulation and privacy online: A report to congress. Retrieved from http://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/public_statements/prepared-statement-federal-trade-commission-self-regulation-and-privacy-online/privacyonlinetestimony.pdf.
- FTC. (2012). FTC strengthens kids’ privacy, gives parents greater control over their information by amending childrens online privacy protection rule. Press Release, Dec 19, 2012. Retrieved from http://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2012/12/ftc-strengthens-kids-privacy-gives-parents-greater-control-over.
- Gandy, O. H. (2012). Coming to terms with chance: Engaging rational discrimination and cumulative disadvantage. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Ltd.Google Scholar
- Google. (2013). What it does—Google Glass. Retrieved from http://www.google.com/glass/start/what-it-does/.
- Hargittai, E. (2008). The digital reproduction of inequality. In D. Grusky (Ed.), Social stratification (pp. 936–944). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
- Hindman, M. (2007). “Open-source politics” reconsidered: Emerging patterns in online political participation. In V. Mayer-Schönberger & D. Lazer (Eds.), From electronic government to information government (pp. 183–207). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Kanter, J. (2013, February 1). Google makes offer in 3-year European antitrust case. The New York Times, pp. 2, B2.Google Scholar
- Larson, J., Glanz, J., & Lehren, A. (2014, January 27). Spy agencies probe angry birds and other apps for personal data. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.propublica.org/article/spy-agencies-probe-angry-birds-and-other-apps-for-personal-data.
- Lessig, L. (1999). Code and other laws of cyberspace. New York: Basic books.Google Scholar
- Maclaren, S. (2014, June 28). The Supreme Court’s baffling tech illiteracy is becoming a problem. Salon. Retrieved from http://www.salon.com/2014/06/28/the_supreme_courts_baffling_tech_illiteracy_is_becoming_a_big_problem/.
- Napoli, P. M. (2001). Foundations of communications policy. New York: Fordham University.Google Scholar
- Negroponte, N. (1995). Being digital. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
- Neuman, W. R. (1991). The future of mass audience. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Neuman, W. R., Park, Y. J., & Panek, E. (2012). Tracking the flow of information into the home: An empirical assessment of the digital revolution in the US from 1960–2005. International Journal of Communication, 6, 1022–1041.Google Scholar
- Park, Y. J. (2013). Offline status, online status: Reproduction of social categories in personal information skill and knowledge. Social Science Computer Review, 31(6), 680–702.Google Scholar
- Pool, I. d. S. (1977). The social impact of telephone. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Pool, I. d. S. (1983). Technologies of freedom. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.Google Scholar
- Purcell, K. (2012, Feburary, 2012). Search engine use survey. Pew Internet & American Life.Google Scholar
- Robinson, N., Graux, H., Botterman, M., & Valeri, L. (2009). Review of the European data protection directive. Cambridge: Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), RAND.Google Scholar
- Stampler, L. (2013). Advertisers can’t stop thinking about the Google Glass ‘pay per gaze’ patent. Business Insider. Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com/advertisers-cant-stop-thinking-about-the-google-glass-pay-per-gaze-patent-2013-8#ixzz2weUtVJvY.
- Strickenland, J. (2013). Why is the Google algorithm so important? How stuff works. Retrieved from http://computer.howstuffworks.com/google-algorithm.htm.
- Sunstein, C. R. (2009). Republic.com 2.0. New Jersey: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- Timberg, C., & King, C. (2013, June 18). Google challenges U.S. gag order, citing First Amendment. Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/technology/google-challenges-us-gag-order-citing-first-amendment/2013/06/18/96835c72-d832-11e2-a9f2-42ee3912ae0e_story.html.
- Turow, J., Carpini, M., & Draper, N. (2012). Americans roundly reject tailored political advertising at a time when political campaigns are embracing it. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania, Annenberg School of Communication.Google Scholar
- Vaidhyanathan, S. (2012). The Googlization of everything (and why we should worry). Berkeley, CA: Univ of California Press.Google Scholar
- Vetter, G. R. (2006). Exit and voice in free and open source software licensing: Moderation the rein over software users. Oregon Law Review, 85, 183–274.Google Scholar
- Wagstaff, K. (2014). Give me your Google Glass and nobody gets hurt! NBC News. Retrived from http://www.nbcnews.com/tech/mobile/give-me-your-google-glass-nobody-gets-hurt-n82131.
- Wasik, B. (2013, December 17). Why wearable tech will be as big as the smartphone. Wired. Retrieved from http://www.wired.com/2013/12/wearable-computers/.
- Wu, T. (2003). Network neutrality, broadband discrimination. Journal of Telecommunications and High Technology Law, 2(1), 141–179.Google Scholar
- Wu, T. (2011). The master switch: The rise and fall of information empires. New Jersey: Random House LLC.Google Scholar