‘They don’t mind their data being collected and scanned’: Google’s Colin Barnard
Google’s Colin Barnard has claimed customers don’t mind having their data collected as long as it’s used to make their online interactions more relevant.
Speaking at Mumbrella’s Finance Marketing Summit, Google Australia’s head of financial and business services told the audience customers are willing to trade their data for a seamless, fast, relevant experience.
“As people are scanning across the landscape they’re leaving breadcrumbs everywhere, data absolutely everywhere, and that doesn’t have to be creepy, because if you can use data by making it relevant to people, they don’t mind that,” he said.
“They don’t mind their data being collected and scanned, as long as what they get back is fundamentally more relevant to their lives, and more relevant to the thing they’re trying to do.”
“It’s more important than ever before to get the right message to the right person at the right time.”
Barnard also spoke about how the role of creative is diminished in our tech-centric world, with relevance and seamlessness taking precedence.
“Creative has had a very large part to play in the past, whereas I think conversations being assistive, and being able to identify your audience and pinpoint those people, understand something about them, and using that data to find out where your most valuable customers are … that’s where smart marketing’s going to happen.”
Well I mind.
It’s in Google’s interest to claim this.
Since they’re in the business of data, I say to them: Show me the data to back up the claim.
User ID not verified.
I do mind. His claim that ‘consumers (me) don’t mind having their data collected if it’s used to make my online interactions more relevant’ is not proven by any… data! How cynical but true.
To support such a claim, users should have an option for A: do not collect my data, or B: collect my data and give me relevant online interactions (in whichever shape or form that may be). If a significant number of people opt for B, then Google could make such a claim; but right now we are only given option B.
Google only gives us the choice between: ‘use our services and give your data in return’, OR ‘do not get access to our services’ (which is, let’s face it, incredible difficult in modern life). Hence, Google’s presented ‘choice for data sharing’ is by indirect force, not by preference. The statement doesn’t sounds intuitively right and is not backed by any methodologically sound scientific research, either.
Otherwise, great presentation.
User ID not verified.