Please Note: Blog posts are not selected, edited or screened by Seeking Alpha editors.

DNT? - Its About USERS And That Real Time "User Intent"

Microsoft's decision in June to give its users a simple choice for them to turn on Do Not Track during install (or, for them to leave it in a position, not allowing advertisers to track them), has upset a few 'apple-carts'.

This article's author from PC World writes, that many of the country's largest companies lashed out at Microsoft claiming that its decision to turn on the "Do Not Track" privacy feature in its IE 10 would:

"harm consumers, hurt competition, and undermine American innovation."

Unbelievable!! (That a choice to turn it on - is harmful to them?)

Have you ever heard anything more sillier sounding than what ad exec Steve Minichini says (?) in this paragraph, here:

"Consumers are empowered by the browsers they choose. .........But Microsoft is forcing DNT on the consumer population, something we're strongly against, and something we think consumers will be strongly against."

The FTC backs Do Not Track, but [Commissioner, Jon] Leibowitz has not expressly thrown his weight behind Microsoft and IE10.

The debate isn't limited to the U.S., as European regulators have also weighed in on DNT, and expressed support for Microsoft's position on IE10.

What is it about how 'regulators' of our world feel about 'what's best for consumers' - that major corporations or, advertisers representing them, don't seem to want to understand?

"[The advertising industry] now stands in open defiance of policymakers on both sides of the Atlantic and, more importantly, the tens of millions of users who have enabled Do Not Track in their browser," said Mayer.

[Jonathan Mayer, one of two Stanford researchers who devised the HTTP header concept used by browsers to signal a user's DNT decision.]

Microsoft's Real [Time] reason?

There are a number of much more efficient alternatives (I feel & one, I'm suggesting is 'on the way', in a pps; HERE), that are far more beneficial financially, for publishers (and go a long way to eliminating the many **cowboys in the industry - along with minimizing click fraud), that (by incorporating viewable Ads), will even become more measurable for those very same (ignorant) advertisers - who are doing the objecting!

It's about USERS

I feel that it's now, all about users (those, eye-balls), NOT content!

(And that it's moving to be mostly about matching a user's 'intent' with your Ad, in real time! - a user that can then be anonymously followed, on to a next publisher's website.)

That for publishers, if you've no 'visitors' to your site-you go broke, ok?

Like myself, Catharine P. Taylor says, in her own 'take' about this 'storm in a tea-cup', that "I will not pretend to be an expert on the issue".

Yet for 'users, Catharine is of the opinion that: "You may see less relevant advertising on websites if you have the do-not-track option activated - assuming that the new, do-not-track-borne economics of the Internet - don't put those websites out of business."

But what would I know? I'm just an unqualified 68 yr old 'pensioner' from across the other side of the world in beautiful Brisbane, Australia.

Always, only an opinion. (I write, purely for fun)

LOOK: $0.80 Up 0.05 (+6.67%) 3:57PM EDT

LC

ps; **cowboys in the industry? "The truth is, if you're a middleman and you're not dead already, you're living on borrowed time."

Disclosure: Long LOOK

.