{"id":7001,"date":"2022-01-26T22:02:05","date_gmt":"2022-01-26T22:02:05","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/mailinvest.blog\/index.php\/2022\/01\/26\/googles-topics-api-provokes-a-range-of-reactions\/"},"modified":"2022-01-26T22:02:05","modified_gmt":"2022-01-26T22:02:05","slug":"googles-topics-api-provokes-a-range-of-reactions","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mailinvest.blog\/index.php\/2022\/01\/26\/googles-topics-api-provokes-a-range-of-reactions\/","title":{"rendered":"Google’s Topics API provokes a range of reactions"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a>\n<\/p>\n

\n

Earlier this week, Google announced the\u00a0Topics API<\/a>, its latest ad targeting proposal aimed at replacing third-party cookies. This leaves Federated Learning of Cohorts dead in the water while marketing and adtech platforms and advertisers try to make sense of the new proposal.<\/p>\n

Topics may be a more realistic option than FLoC, marketers say<\/h2>\n

\u201cTopics seem more likely to be acceptable to the broader ecosystem as they address several FLoC privacy concerns head on,\u201d said Aaron Levy, head of paid search at Tinuiti. \u201cIt\u2019s odd to call this an advantage, but I view anything that launches with a higher likelihood of stability and lesser likelihood of mass opt-outs a win.\u201d<\/p>\n

The other practitioners seemed to concur. \u201cOn their face, Topics seem like they should be less personally identifiable, which would be a plus for privacy,\u201d said Julie Friedman Bacchini, president of Neptune Moon and managing director of PPC community PPCChat.<\/p>\n

\u201cI like that Chrome users will be able to see their topics and delete them if they wish,\u201d said Christine Zirnheld, digital marketing manager at Cypress North. While this feature can make life harder for advertisers, options for users will help to appease privacy advocates and regulators, which increases the chances that Google will eventually be able to launch Topics.<\/p>\n

Topic diversity and other potential hurdles for advertisers<\/h2>\n

The Topics API\u2019s initial design includes approximately 350 topics, according to its\u00a0GitHub page<\/a>. Advertisers are concerned that this quantity won\u2019t be sufficient enough to provide relevant targeting.<\/p>\n

\u201cGoogle\u2019s current interest list [of topics] doesn\u2019t offer the level of nuance most marketers need to target people who\u2019d actually want to see their ads,\u201d said Ashwin Balakrishnan, head of marketing at Optmyzr. \u201cIf Topics is going to be a success, Google needs to provide more detailed options.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cAdvertisers (at least as of now) would have few interests to actually target, and broader targeting does not usually lead to better performance,\u201d Zirnheld said. \u201cAn interest in cars & autos doesn\u2019t tell me if that\u2019s luxury, rental, new, used, SUV, etc.,\u201d Geddes added, \u201cThat means there will be more competition for less targeted ads,\u201d noting that, at this point, it is still too difficult to predict how Topics will work in practice.<\/p>\n

For reference, the\u00a0IAB Audience Taxonomy<\/a>\u00a0contains approximately 1,500 audience segments. \u201cOne of the most popular drinks in the U.S. is Coffee,\u201d Zirnheld provided as an example. \u201cThe IAB Taxonomy has \u2018Coffee,\u2019 \u2018Coffee & Tea,\u2019 \u2018Coffee Creamer,\u2019 \u2018Coffee Filters,\u2019 and \u2018Tea\/Coffee \u2013 Ready-to-drink.\u2019 The closest\u00a0topic<\/a>\u00a0Google has (at the moment) is \u2018Food & Drink.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n

Despite the relatively low number of topics designed into the initial proposal, Google may already be aware of this issue: \u201cThis is a starting point; we could see this getting into the low thousands or staying in the hundreds [of topics],\u201d said Ben Galbraith, Chrome product director.<\/p>\n

In addition to the potentially limited topics, \u201cThe limited timeframe could be concerning for advertisers, as they are used to much more persistent inclusion of an audience than one to three weeks,\u201d Bacchini said, caveating that it remains to be seen whether keeping interests more current might also yield benefits. Levy also touched upon this concern: \u201cIt feels more directionally accurate than truly precise,\u201d he said. \u201cI hope for some sort of a boolean setup longer term where we\u2019re able to combine, expand or narrow topics, but of course time will tell.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

As a privacy measure, there is a 5% chance that a random topic is returned, according to the\u00a0GitHub page<\/a>. This is to ensure that each topic has a minimum number of members. \u201cWhile I understand that this helps ensure anonymity and privacy for internet users, this is obviously not a good thing for advertisers,\u201d Zirnheld added.<\/p>\n

Chrome might be the only browser to adopt, but that might not matter for some<\/h2>\n

\u201cChrome is still the big boy in the browser war,\u201d said Steve Hammer, president and co-founder at RankHammer, \u201cI do think Edge will matter as more people get Windows 11, but that\u2019s the lone one I\u2019d worry about for clients.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cWhile Chrome\u2019s market share is (slightly) shrinking, I don\u2019t anticipate this\u2019ll change our usage at all,\u201d Levy said, \u201cRather, it will all fit into a broader theme of treating the data as directional rather than \u2018right.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cIf it\u2019s limited to Chrome, we\u2019ll see how that affects iPhone users,\u201d Geddes said, noting that, \u201cThe lack of cross-browser support is a bit worrisome, but it won\u2019t affect anyone\u2019s budget if they are getting good returns from their marketing dollars.\u201d<\/p>\n

If Chrome claims enough of the browser market, that might empower Google to continue with the Topics API without having to go to the bargaining table with its competitors. That independence can help the company stick to its\u00a0Privacy Sandbox timeline<\/a>, which shows that all associated initiatives are slated to be launched in Chrome sometime in Q4 2022.<\/p>\n

Is Topics an improvement over FLoC?<\/h2>\n

As with all potential third-party cookie replacements, Topics must be evaluated from the user privacy perspective as well as the advertiser perspective. \u201cFLoC raised privacy concerns and Topics seems more privacy-friendly and attempts to provide more control and transparency to internet users. In that way, Topics is \u2018better,\u2019\u201d Zirnheld said.<\/p>\n

\u201cHowever, this means broader targeting for advertisers, meaning less control over who sees our ads,\u201d she noted. \u201cWe might have to get more creative with targeting for our clients if this is the route Chrome is taking.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cFor advertisers, I expect that Topics wind up more restrictive with less options and less precision than we were hoping for from FLoC (which is already a reduction of current tactics),\u201d Levy said. \u201cIt\u2019s annoying, but also encouraging that Google is trying to come up with a solution that works for everybody.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n

Google is trying to address the significant pushback and concerns provoked by FLoC, said Yahoo CBO Iv\u00e1n Markman. \u201cIt is yet to be seen whether this next iteration is workable, given how high level and short-time-spanned it is. Google\u2019s FLoC received negative policy and industry feedback, and there was concern that FLoC IDs could have been exploited for cross-site user tracking. With the release of Topics API, Google is providing a higher level of user obfuscation and localized browser storage vs. a centralized storage location.\u201d<\/p>\n

Wayne Coburn, director of product at cross-channel marketing platform Iterable added: \u201cGoogle\u2019s pivot \u2014 from FloC to Topics \u2014 shows that consumers have lobbying power and a voice they are not afraid to use. People understand that their data is valuable, and they are moving to preserve the value of their assets. With FLoC, Google was trying to ensure their continued dominance in the advertising space, and both consumers and the ad industry responded with a resounding no. With Topics, Google is admitting they need to do more to preserve and protect consumer privacy.\u201d<\/p>\n

Ultimately, third-party cookies are going away, so expect growing pains<\/h2>\n

\u201cThe current conversations around FLoC Topics highlight one thing: Third-party (aka advertising) cookies are dead,\u201d said Coburn. \u201cIt is more important than ever for marketers to have and maintain quality first-party data. Consumers have to be able to trust the brands they interact with \u2014 from the ethics of the brand through to the way it handles personal information \u2014 and if a consumer doesn\u2019t trust a brand, they aren\u2019t going to let their data anywhere near it. That isn\u2019t going to change, so the way big tech handles data has to.\u201d<\/p>\n

However, \u201cAnything that is a departure from cookies is going to feel like a step down in targeting, I think,\u201d Bacchini said. \u201cWe are going to have to adjust our thinking about what \u2018accurate targeting\u2019 actually means and come down off of the sense of strong or accurate targeting that we feel like we have had up until this point.\u201d<\/p>\n

Additional reporting by Kim Davis.<\/em><\/p>\n\n

\n

About The Author<\/h3>\n
\n
\n
\n
\n