By the power of Catch Up, I have the news!
In terms of privacy, the way we use the Internet has never been so deliberately risky. However, 63% of Internet users worldwide are concerned about the use of their personal data. According to another study, the misuse of data is the main cause of mistrust in digital technology. In terms of B2B, 8 out of 10 people say they are ready to stop doing business with a company that misuses their data. Trust in digital is crumbling, to such an extent that Internet users are beginning to take the initiative in limiting their digital footprint – such as deactivating their geolocation, deleting their history, using ad blockers, returning to physical purchasing, limitation of connections on smartphones, abandoning certain social networks… The word is that Facebook has just announced that it will organise an independent privacy protection committee… So, will they save the day?!
With people increasingly talking about the need for a data-driven approach in organisations, the question of data quality has come to the fore. And it’s about time – according to a Harvard Business Review study, only 3% of data is currently of acceptable quality in companies. In addition to a technological approach, it is a business issue, which therefore must involve Governance. The Electronic Business Group published a full report on the subject (available here in French). The implementation of a data value-measurement instrument (MDM or Master Data Management) seems logical, in a context where there is no predefined governance model, and where a range of departments are involved (IT, CDO, CTO, ExCom). It’s therefore important for everyone to take up the subject and work on their data culture (especially marketing and business departments) – with the aim of having common references, understanding the stakes involved and weighing up decisions to take on structured data projects, costing hundreds of thousands of euros. Some European web analytics players (click here) have already taken the lead through a series of initiatives that ensure data reliability: quality control features, no sampling, privacy compliance (GDPR), certifications, measurement independence (no conflict of interest).
The backlash against the tech giants is seen almost daily in repeated scandals, fines for abuse of dominant positions, public movements, state boundaries, etc. Despite this, there are still major profits being made. Gone are the days when the Silicon Valley model had a silver lining. Over the last 5 or 6 years, the atmosphere has become more sinister, and the machine has started jamming from the inside. Tech employees (still human apparently) began by opposing the most controversial projects and cases – search engines allowing censorship, defence drones, sexism or discrimination cases. Despite various initiatives in Europe, the mobilization of the public has been slow to say the least, and many seem unaware of the issues at stake. Governments also don’t help when they let FAANG occupy the public space so freely. Nevertheless, a movement is rising and there seem to be new hopes for justice, equality and democracy on the horizon – as well as a shift in the way technology is conceived.
A mathematical model has been drawn up to show how the practice of paying for influencers is a bad idea. Abuses such as disguised advertising, counterfeit products or fake audiences often force new regulations in the sector, but this new standard practice is having seriously negative effects. The model is based on the analysis of the interactions and decisions of influencers, followers and marketers for content that can be labelled as “sponsored”. It argues that too much transparency on the origin of content would reduce followers’ engagement and influencers’ revenues. This financial loss would lead influencers into a vicious circle, pushing them to produce more sponsored content to make up for the losses. This in turn will aggravate the situation and lead to a breakdown in influential marketing. This thesis therefore promotes an approach of gaining in efficiency by being non-transparent – which still raises several ethical questions.
Notre Dame in 3D
As it happened during the cathedral fire – a detailed look back at the events with an interactive 3D visualisation, by the NY Times.
See you next time on the Internets!
New York Times