Charter's Big Brother Move Criticized

Consumers and lawmakers alike are raising concerns about Charter Communications Inc.’s planned trial of a technology that will track users Internet destinations in order to push targeted ads in front of those users.

            The trial will involve limited markets: San Luis Obispo, CA.; Ft. Worth, TX.; Oxburg, MA. and Newtown, CT. Charter began last week that notifying high-speed data customers in those markets last week that, for the next 30 days, they will be subjected to an “enhanced online experience.”

Let’s call a spade a spade: it’s a potential “enhanced revenue experience,” a benefit to the operator if it can prove to online advertisers that this technology, from NebuAd, is more effective than random web ads.

Props to Charter for going public with the campaign. We’ve heard the criticisms heaped on Comcast Corp. for its lack of candor about throttling web hogs. But the trial falls short by relying on opt out, rather than opt in options for web surfers who don’t want Big Brother watching over their shoulders. Observers, from the end users to privacy advocates, are raising alarms on the Internet, both about the announced program and the opt-out methodology. For instance, one consumer has sent a letter to Charter deeming the online process for opting out “woefully inadequate,” asserting that the form consumers must fill out to avoid monitoring is not subject to Secure Sockets Layer encryption ( read the consumer’s letter here: http://consumerist.com/5008801/charter-to-begin-tracking-users-searches-and-inserting-targeted-ads ).

But according to Ted Schremp, Charter’s senior vice president of product marketing and strategy, the opt-out form is SSL protected. For a couple of days, as the notifications were going out last week in advance of the June trial, various links sent consumers to outdated material, he said.

An honest answer, but not the kind of lapse a consumer want to hear about, not when cable companies identify consumers with their Social Security numbers, THE most sensitive piece of personally identifiable information sought by thieves.

Consumers are also criticizing the opt-out technological process: consumers must accept a cookie that will block the spying. But if a consumer is diligent about purging their temporary Internet files and cookies on their home machines, they must remember to get a new cookie and install it each time they tidy up their system.

Schremp defended the execution, stating Charter conducted focus groups on the Internet monitoring program in the pilot markets. Respondents noted that multiple consumers use the same PCs in homes, and each user may want to decide whether to opt in or out. The cookies are user-identified, so that methodology allows for individual decisions on the program within a household.

“A cookie-base program supports (the notion of choice),” Schremp said.

But lawmaker concerns may cause more problems for Charter that that of Internet bloggers. On May 16, Reps. Ed Markey (D-MA) and Joe Barton (R-TX) sent a letter to Charter CEO Neil Smit, asking the executive to delay the trial until the company can explain the program to legislators. They are especially critical that the program is opt out, not opt in. Charter officials said they believe they have satisfactory privacy requirements but are willing to discuss them.