Virgin Media Phorm Webwise Adverts [Updated: See Post No. 1, 77, 102 & 797]

[CaptJamieHunter]

Originally Posted by PhormUKPRteam

Hi all

{usual spin and bluster}

Straight back to the trenches after the Easter holidays. It must be very boring going to the same old forums posting the same old spin which doesn't answer anyone's questions.

And just as I predicted you've tried to spin the Guardian's rejection of Phorm by completely ignoring the one issue that really hurts Phorm. I'll repost it here in case you missed it:

Our decision was in no small part down to the conversations we had internally about how this product sits with the values of our company... In this instance, however, I agree with you that this is not something that we should be partnering.

The Phorm brand stands for intrusiveness and invasion of privacy. Phorm has done NOTHING to demonstrate its trustworthiness. When an organisation with a public moral standing such as The Guardian says "no thank you" then it is clear that Phorm falls short of a decent standard of moral conduct.

Remember Sir Tim Berners-Lee, the man you want to "re-educate"? (Oh, the arrogance!) Let me quote him again in case this fact hasn't yet penetrated your minds. On his internet browsing data he said:

"It's mine, you can't have it"

And here's another quote for you. One you should recognise...

"As you browse, we’re able to categorize all of your Internet actions," said Virasb Vahidi, the chief operating officer of Phorm. "We actually can see the entire Internet."

Still claim you're trustworthy now?

The easiest way to silence a cynic is to prove him wrong openly and honestly. Hopping round forums spouting the same old spin isn't going to do that.

[punky]

Originally Posted by PhormUKPRteam

Hi all
Hope you all had a good Easter? With reference to the above discussion, the Register article in the Guardian neatly highlights the two central issues here: protecting online privacy and needing ad funding to pay for Internet services. Of course people are concerned about the trade off they think they have to make between getting a personalised service on the one hand and giving up personal data on the other - we agree that they shouldn't have to make that pay off. So are you happy to be served targeted ads by companies that use your personal data and store it for more than 12 months before it is even anonymised? Surely it is better to have a system that stores absolutely no personal information, no IP addresses and no browsing histories - like us or not, that's a better privacy environment than you currently get.

Online ad targeting is not going away; something the Guardian confirms in its statement. The reason that we've had such an enthusiastic response from the companies that we meet is that the Phorm system can earn ISPs and publishers - big and small - more money to plough back into the services you receive today - most of them for free. If not ad funding, then what other way is the Internet going to be paid for? Most Internet publishers have abandoned subscriptions because not enough people are actually prepared to pay when it comes down to it.

As always, if you have any queries or want any more information, visit www.webwise.com or www.phorm.com

How about this for a compromise: Instead of VM monitoring my browsing habits (which is actually very inaccurate. Just because I visit a website doesn't mean I have any interest in it*), how about asking the customer to voluntarily supply the necessary metrics to VM (I could describe my interests (say Electronics, Spurs, etc)? At the end of the day so long as you deliver an appropriately-targetted advert on behalf of your clients, it shouldn't matter to you how the data is collated.



* Example 1: When the BNP/heroin photo news article came out, I wanted to see it for myself. One of the sites I tried was the BNP itself. That doesn't mean I want to see BNP-related ads in the future. Example 2: My partner uses my connection via router and laptop. There is no way for VM to differentiate between which computer is doing the browsing, so it is just as likely to serve me Tampax adverts instead of my girlfriend.

[OF1975]

Welcome back to the forum PhormUKPRTeam

Yes thank you I had a good easter. I hope you did too. I am currently spending all day at home waiting for a repairman to come fix our fridge/freezer. Ho hum.

Two salient points in response to your post.

1) Freedom of Choice: I see a wealth of difference between say google, yahoo etc and your system. As I and others have said before, with phorm being at the ISP level, in effect you get to get profile us on the totality of our browsing habits. In essence, if I dont want google, yahoo, (insert other company here) profiling me then I can easily choose to change to another or spread my searches and browsing around. It is not so simple to change Internet Providers. No doubt you will argue that we have choice in that we can turn webwise off or "opt-out" but considering the paucity of information coming out of Virgin Media and yourself regarding exactly how this system will work I remain yet to be convinced. Coincidentally, Virgin Media really need to wise up and start dealing with this rather than just hanging your client out to dry. This is not going away.

2) Quid Pro Quo There is no de facto quid pro quo where webwise and the Phorm system is concerned. As has been pointed out many times the anti-phishing technology is nothing new and most likely no better than the anti-phishing technology already existant in IE7 and Firefox. Similarly, "more relevant ads" are actually pointless for me and I expect many others too. I dont look at online ads and I have no intention to start. If I want to buy something online then I will go look for it myself and speak to friends to get their recommendations.

I acknowledge you raise important points about other companies storing data but again, I must refer back to my point above about the fact that I have a great deal of freedom. I can choose to share my browsing around different search engines. Phorms system effectively profiles me based on the totality of my browsing and provides nothing in return. To take your oft quoted example of gmail, they provide an easy to use, convenient web based email service with large storage. Yes they profile and store data but if I so choose to, use their service I get something with real value in response.

Trying to argue that the revenue the ISPs earn from this will be ploughed back into our services really is a staggering example of disingenious PR in my opinion. Virgin Media is already one of the most expensive Internet Providers and is in a huge amount of debt.

[SMHarman]

Originally Posted by Gavin

Example 1: When the BNP/heroin photo news article came out, I wanted to see it for myself. One of the sites I tried was the BNP itself. That doesn't mean I want to see BNP-related ads in the future. Example 2: My partner uses my connection via router and laptop. There is no way for VM to differentiate between which computer is doing the browsing, so it is just as likely to serve me Tampax adverts instead of my girlfriend.

E1 - 1 hit does not make a pattern. E2 - if it is a different computer and different cookie then this is irrelivant. The only time this will occur is if both you and her use the same computer with the same logon (or no logon).

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by lostandconfused

What about ntl:telewest business accounts? I would have thought they they still use the Virgin Media network, but havent been branded as yet

I don't know about those.

[manxminx]

Originally Posted by PhormUKPRteam

Hi all
Hope you all had a good Easter?

Yep, great Easter, thanks, hope you enjoyed the break yourself - you needed it! Glad you're back, things were getting a bit one sided while you were gone

Originally Posted by PhormUKPRteam

So are you happy to be served targeted ads by companies that use your personal data and store it for more than 12 months before it is even anonymised?

Definitely not! I totally agree with you! ( See, we can agree on some things )Which is why I do my best to block all ad cookies and other things with my browser add-ons

Originally Posted by PhormUKPRteam

Surely it is better to have a system that stores absolutely no personal information, no IP addresses and no browsing histories - like us or not, that's a better privacy environment than you currently get.

In theory, yes (oh dear, I'm agreeing with you again, this is getting to be a habit!) But at what price?

What I'm against is my internet browsing being hijacked, mirrored, scanned even though I'm going to opt out. I also object to the Phorm software scanning my private webforum. Where is the opt out button for website owners?

Also, what worries me, is that although you make various promises, both here and elsewhere on various blogs etc, a lot of what Phorm says contradicts itself, or is a downright lie. How can we believe what you say? For example, What did Virasb Vahidi recently tell the New York Times? “We actually can see the entire Internet.” How does that sit with your post above where you suggest that Phorm is on our side privacy wise? Also, there is the matter of the Phorm patent. If you want to create and foster an attitude of ' your privacy is our highest concern' then why does you patent say different?

Your turn . . .

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by PhormUKPRteam

Hi all
Hope you all had a good Easter? With reference to the above discussion, the Register article in the Guardian neatly highlights the two central issues here: protecting online privacy and needing ad funding to pay for Internet services. Of course people are concerned about the trade off they think they have to make between getting a personalised service on the one hand and giving up personal data on the other - we agree that they shouldn't have to make that pay off. So are you happy to be served targeted ads by companies that use your personal data and store it for more than 12 months before it is even anonymised? Surely it is better to have a system that stores absolutely no personal information, no IP addresses and no browsing histories - like us or not, that's a better privacy environment than you currently get.

Again, you ignore the point. A lot of people don't mind advertising (targetted or not). They don't exactly like it, but they consider it a necessary evil. Most people probably wouldn't be too bothered about being monitored if the ISP was open about it (none have been so far), or they were getting a service for it. No, I do not count Webwise as a service, because it does something most modern browsers already do for free.

You mention other online ad services. I can only assume you mean Google. Google do track you (and are fairly open about doing so). But, for them to track you, you need to sign in to one of their services. Sign in is optional on their search (which does, admittedly, record your searches against your IP, which Google are fairly open about). If you sign in, you also get a good email/IM system, a news aggregation service and access to enhancements in some of their software. The software is also free. If you sign in, you are also tracked through Google Ads. Fair enough.

However, if you are not signed in, you can still prevent yourself from being tracked (should you so want). Just disable (or block) javascript in your browser.

Phorm does not offer this option.

Online ad targeting is not going away; something the Guardian confirms in its statement. The reason that we've had such an enthusiastic response from the companies that we meet is that the Phorm system can earn ISPs and publishers - big and small - more money to plough back into the services you receive today - most of them for free. If not ad funding, then what other way is the Internet going to be paid for? Most Internet publishers have abandoned subscriptions because not enough people are actually prepared to pay when it comes down to it.

Oh, I have no problem with internet advertising, as I have said before. This site is funded by adverts, I'd be a hypocrite to moderate here if I hated them.

It's the underhand way the monitoring is done that I have a problem with.

[kt88man]

Originally Posted by PhormUKPRteam

Hi all
Hope you all had a good Easter?

...snip all of the usual attempt to make us 'see the light'

I just had a feeling we would be hearing from you today. Yes, I did indeed have a good Easter, thank you.

I trust you and tour team did also, perhaps you were able to spend a little time actually investigating some of the issues raised rather than relying on what Phorm pheeds (sorry, feeds) you. Or perhaps you occupied your time by updating your CV to reflect all of the good PR work that you are doing for your client.

Public opinion does seem to be swinging in your favour, the ever increasing petition against this technology, the falling share price, potential advertisers pulling out - hmm... yeah looks like you're winning the PR game.

Bottom line for me is this i was against phorm from the beginning and when the phormpr team came into it all it has done is nothing but harden my stance towards phorm. PhormPR your not really interested in addressing anyone's concern's your a little mechanism to spread the pre-prepared statements from your client and you don't even care that most of the statements are at best misleading and at worst an outright damn lie.

What i want and what everyone wants is someone to come on this and all the other websites and talk to us about the technical aspect and answer those concerns you cannot or will not do that. So do your client a favour and go away your pouring petrol onto a well burning fire and having about as much impact as a pea on an elephant's ass.

I know the mods asked us all to be polite towards you but i am now really struggling to be anything other then rude and insulting to you as thats how your acting towards us with your drivel of crap regarding a system you don't know about and don't care how it affects anyone as long as your cheque clears.

[PC_Arcade]

For those of you claiming there's no such thing as an NTLtelewest customer, I have "Examined the logo at the top of my bills" and it's the same logo appearing on my ISP's homepage : http://www.ntltelewestbusiness.co.uk/

So my question stands, is phorm being used on the business arm of virgin, or just the consumer arm?

The back end is clearly not the same as there's no STM for business customers and we have better contention ratios

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by PC_Arcade

For those of you claiming there's no such thing as an NTLtelewest customer, I have "Examined the logo at the top of my bills" and it's the same logo appearing on my ISP's homepage : http://www.ntltelewestbusiness.co.uk/

Already addressed:

Originally Posted by Stuart C

I don't know about those.

It's also worth noting that NTL:Telewest business is a seperate company. They just happen to use the same cable network.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by PhormUKPRteam

Hi all
Hope you all had a good Easter? With reference to the above discussion, the Register article in the Guardian neatly highlights the two central issues here: protecting online privacy and needing ad funding to pay for Internet services. Of course people are concerned about the trade off they think they have to make between getting a personalised service on the one hand and giving up personal data on the other - we agree that they shouldn't have to make that pay off. So are you happy to be served targeted ads by companies that use your personal data and store it for more than 12 months before it is even anonymised? Surely it is better to have a system that stores absolutely no personal information, no IP addresses and no browsing histories - like us or not, that's a better privacy environment than you currently get.

Online ad targeting is not going away; something the Guardian confirms in its statement. The reason that we've had such an enthusiastic response from the companies that we meet is that the Phorm system can earn ISPs and publishers - big and small - more money to plough back into the services you receive today - most of them for free. If not ad funding, then what other way is the Internet going to be paid for? Most Internet publishers have abandoned subscriptions because not enough people are actually prepared to pay when it comes down to it.

As always, if you have any queries or want any more information, visit www.webwise.com or www.phorm.com

You just dont get it do you.

WE DONT WANT YOUR SPYWARE

[popper]

Originally Posted by PC_Arcade

For those of you claiming there's no such thing as an NTLtelewest customer, I have "Examined the logo at the top of my bills" and it's the same logo appearing on my ISP's homepage : http://www.ntltelewestbusiness.co.uk/

So my question stands, is phorm being used on the business arm of virgin, or just the consumer arm?

The back end is clearly not the same as there's no STM for business customers and we have better contention ratios

your mistaken, the so called back end is exactly the same, your VM/NTL/tw supplyed CPE CM/router plugs into the very same end user UBRs at the other end, they just choose not to STM you at this time.

and so,potentially can be subject to all the Phorming they might wasnt to perform, the question then is, will Virgin Media be silly enough to include the as yet non VM branded cable business accounts as well ?(they said they would re-brand at some point remember, stuart).

thats yet to be answered OC, as is the case with all the other questions...., they keep mounting up.

[AlexanderHanff]

Originally Posted by PhormUKPRteam

Hi all
Hope you all had a good Easter? With reference to the above discussion, the Register article in the Guardian neatly highlights the two central issues here: protecting online privacy and needing ad funding to pay for Internet services. Of course people are concerned about the trade off they think they have to make between getting a personalised service on the one hand and giving up personal data on the other - we agree that they shouldn't have to make that pay off. So are you happy to be served targeted ads by companies that use your personal data and store it for more than 12 months before it is even anonymised? Surely it is better to have a system that stores absolutely no personal information, no IP addresses and no browsing histories - like us or not, that's a better privacy environment than you currently get.

Online ad targeting is not going away; something the Guardian confirms in its statement. The reason that we've had such an enthusiastic response from the companies that we meet is that the Phorm system can earn ISPs and publishers - big and small - more money to plough back into the services you receive today - most of them for free. If not ad funding, then what other way is the Internet going to be paid for? Most Internet publishers have abandoned subscriptions because not enough people are actually prepared to pay when it comes down to it.

As always, if you have any queries or want any more information, visit www.webwise.com or www.phorm.com

You best start singing for your supper mate because at this rate Phorm won't have any money to pay your wages. You have failed, epically.

Let me give you an example of how the web works. I used to own a website called dvdr-core.org a controversial website which ended up getting me sued for $150 million USD. But lets forget that part for a moment (since it is irrelevant as no judgement has ever been made against me by a court) and look at the relevant part of why I chose it for an example.

We had a cluster of server in the Netherlands which cost around $8000 USD per month to lease. We had no ad revenue as we had no ads, we had no private investors and we had no money of our own to fund the project. Yet the bills always got paid because the users, who valued the service offered by the website, opened their wallets and sent us donations.

My above example is not alone, there are 10s of thousands of websites out there that survive on donations one of the bigger ones you might recognise is Wikipedia. Ad revenue is NOT the only way a website can make revenue, if you provide a service people want, they will pay, it is that simple. If you provide them with nothing they want, they will never visit you again.

The ISPs could very easily increase their revenue simply by increasing their prices. People are not going to dump the Internet and all the benefits it gives them just because their ISP fees go up 5-10 GBP per month. With music rights people (Fergal Sharky for example) looking like they are going to offer ISPs a revenue incentive by including music downloads into ISP services at a flat rate (which it has to be said was inevitable) ISPs will soon be in a stronger position financially. The same is likely to happen with IPTV services and Video on Demand services. ISPs don't need to become Criminals under RIPA to make money, they simply need to offer their consumers services they want and lets get one thing straight here, consumers do NOT WANT PHORM.

You have lost the battle, your share price is at an all time low and you are starting to lose partners. Your product is a brand killer as clearly stated by the Guardian today. I hope you end up in the dole queue and I know I am not alone in my sentiments.

Alexander Hanff

[OF1975]

for Alexander.