An anonymous reader shares a report: Jonathan Kanter has been one of Google's main legal foes for nearly 15 years. Last week, as the nation's top antitrust cop, he delivered a threat to break up the internet company. Mr. Kanter, the Justice Department's assistant attorney general for antitrust, filed a lawsuit alleging that Google is an illegal monopolist in the market for brokering ads on the internet. Some of the complaints trace back to early 2000s, when Mr. Kanter started questioning Google's role in the digital economy on behalf of his then-legal clients, including Microsoft.

The 140-page lawsuit, which Google, a unit of Alphabet, has said includes untrue allegations and misstatements about its business, embraces charges the government once wrote off as far-fetched. In 2008, the Federal Trade Commission, which also polices threats to competition, said Google wouldn't be able to smother rivals in the digital-advertising world and declined to block its purchase of DoubleClick, an ad broker that the Justice Department now says Google should be forced to sell. The DOJ's lawsuit alleges that threats the FTC dismissed actually came to pass. The company built a moat around its business matching web publishers' supply of ad space with advertisers' demand, according to the DOJ's lawsuit. When new companies tried to compete or customers sought better deals, Google responded by blocking rivals from its platform or buying them outright and forcing them to work only with its products, the lawsuit alleges.

Mr. Kanter, 49 years old, is one of the leaders of a movement that sees big technology companies including Google, Amazon.com, Facebook parent Meta Platforms and Apple as monopolists in the tradition of the 19th-century railroad and oil companies that inspired the original antitrust laws. "Today there is nobody in the world who knows more about that business and the antitrust issues surrounding it than Jonathan," said Charles "Rick" Rule, who worked with Mr. Kanter in private practice. "He has been confronting Google for 15 years." Mr. Kanter has spent most of his legal career in private practice, sometimes defending corporate clients from government investigations, but also representing companies in pressing law enforcers to go after rivals that have grown dominant. He began looking into Google during the 2000s decade on behalf of Microsoft, which the DOJ in 1998 alleged was an illegal monopolist in the personal-computer market in a lawsuit settled in 2001.

A 13-minute segment on a recent episode of CBS's 60 Minutes appeared to be a news story on Novo Nordisk's weight-loss drug Wegovy, but was actually a sponsored promotion violating federal regulations, according to the nonprofit public health advocacy organization Physicians Committee. From a report: The group filed a complaint with the Food and Drug Administration last week, arguing that the segment, which aired on January 1, violates the FDA's "fair balance" requirement. This law requires that drug advertisements give a fair balance to a drug's risks and benefits. The Physicians Committee claims that CBS's 60 Minutes received advertising payments from Novo Nordisk prior to the coverage, and that the aired segment only included experts who had also been paid by Novo Nordisk. The segment lauded the drug with words and phrases such as "highly effective," "safe," "impressive," "fabulous," and "robust," but didn't delve into side effects or alternative treatments and strategies for weight loss.

Apple is taking steps to separate its mobile operating system from features offered by Google parent Alphabet, making advances around maps, search and advertising that has created a collision course between the Big Tech companies. From a report: The two Silicon Valley giants have been rivals in the smartphone market since Google acquired and popularized the Android operating system in the 2000s. Apple co-founder Steve Jobs called Android "a stolen product" that mimicked Apple's iOS mobile software, then declared "thermonuclear war" on Google, ousting the search company's then-CEO Eric Schmidt from the Apple board of directors in 2009. While the rivalry has been less noisy since, two former Apple engineers said the iPhone maker has held a "grudge" against Google ever since. One of these people said Apple is still engaged in a "silent war" against its arch-rival. It is doing so by developing features that could allow the iPhone-maker to further separate its products from services offered by Google.

[...] The second front in the battle is search. While Apple rarely discusses products while in development, the company has long worked on a feature known internally as "Apple Search," a tool that facilitates "billions of searches" per day, according to employees on the project. Apple's search team dates back to at least 2013, when it acquired Topsy Labs, a start-up that had indexed Twitter to enable searches and analytics. The technology is used every time an iPhone user asks Apple's voice assistant Siri for information, types queries from the home screen, or uses the Mac's "Spotlight" search feature. Apple's search offering was augmented with the 2019 purchase of Laserlike, an artificial intelligence start-up founded by former Google engineers that had described its mission as delivering "high quality information and diverse perspectives on any topic from the entire web."

Alphabet's Google says it believes the complaint from the U.S. Department of Justice accusing the company of abusing its dominance in digital advertising is "without merit." From a report: The company also added it will "defend itself vigorously". The government on Tuesday said Google should be forced to sell its ad manager suite, tackling a business that generated about 12% of Google's revenue in 2021 while also playing a vital role in the search engine and cloud company's overall sales. Google, which depends on its advertising business for about 80% of its revenue, said the government was "doubling down on a flawed argument that would slow innovation, raise advertising fees and make it harder for thousands of small businesses and publishers to grow." The federal government has said its Big Tech investigations and lawsuits are aimed at leveling the playing field for smaller rivals who are up against a group of powerful companies that include Amazon, Facebook-owner Meta and Apple.

The US Justice Department and eight states sued Alphabet's Google, calling for the break up of the search giant's ad-technology business over alleged illegal monopolization of the digital advertising market. From a report: "Google abuses its monopoly power to disadvantage website publishers and advertisers who dare to use competing ad tech products in a search for higher quality, or lower cost, matches," the Justice Department said in the complaint, which was filed in federal court in Virginia. New York, California and Virginia were among the states that signed on to the complaint.

The lawsuit represents the Biden administration's first major case challenging the power of one of the nation's largest tech companies, following through on a probe that began under former President Donald Trump. It also marks one of the few times the Justice Department has called for the breakup of a major company since it dismantled the Bell telecom system in 1982. Google is the dominant player in the $278.6 billion US digital-ad market, controlling most of the technology used to buy, sell and serve online advertising. A resolution in the case could be years away. The lawsuit marks the DOJ's second antitrust suit against Google and the fifth major case in the US challenging the company's business practices.

The New York City Department of Correction wants to stop incarcerated people from receiving physical mail inside city jails. From a report: The department, known as DOC, said the proposed changes are part of an effort to increase safety in the jail system by cracking down on illegal contraband following the deaths of 19 people last year at Rikers Island, the city's jail complex. Several of the people died from apparent drug overdoses, including at least one from fentanyl.

The main source of contraband inside city jails, though, has been corrections staff, not mail, critics of the policy change said. Instead, the move to scrap physical mail opens the door to private firms to set up surveillance systems against incarcerated people. City officials and advocates are concerned about an apparent plan to contract with a company called Securus -- a leading provider of phone calling systems for prisons and jails with a controversial past -- to digitize detainees' mail and make it available to searches.

"Contractors are explicitly advertising unprecedented surveillance," said Stephanie Krent, a staff attorney at the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, speaking about firms like Securus that specialize in prison communications. "That's surveillance that's going to fall most harshly on marginalized communities." The proposed changes follow a nationwide trend of prisons and jails moving to stop incarcerated people from receiving physical mail. Prisons in Pennsylvania stopped physical mail in 2018, and prisons in Massachusetts started sending incarcerated people photocopies of original letters. Last year, prisons in New Mexico and Florida adopted similar changes, and Texas has also limited in-person mail. There is little evidence that those changes have stopped the flow of drugs, the Vera Institute wrote in a March report: "With no evidence that these bans improve security, it's only the for-profit contractors that stand to benefit from these arrangements."

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Ars Technica: According to a new study, a little over 70 percent of prescription drugs advertised on television were rated as having "low therapeutic value," meaning they offer little benefit compared with drugs already on the market. The study, appearing in JAMA Open Network, aligns with longstanding skepticism that heavily promoted drugs have high therapeutic value. "One explanation might be that drugs with substantial therapeutic value are likely to be recognized and prescribed without advertising, so manufacturers have greater incentive to promote drugs of lesser value," said the authors, which include researchers at Harvard, Yale, and Dartmouth.

For the new study, researchers led by Aaron Kesselheim, who leads Harvard's Program On Regulation, Therapeutics, And Law (PORTAL), looked at monthly lists of the top-advertised drugs on TV in the US between 2015 and 2021. They also looked up therapeutic value ratings for those drugs from independent health assessment agencies in Canada, France, and Germany. The value ratings were based on drugs' therapeutic benefit, safety profile, and strength of evidence, as compared with existing drugs. Any drug rated "moderate" or above was classified as a "high value" drug for the study. For drugs with multiple ratings, the study authors used the most favorable rating, which they note could overestimate the proportion of higher-benefit drugs.

Of the top advertised drugs, 73 had at least one value rating. Collectively, pharmaceutical companies spent $22.3 billion on advertising for those 73 drugs between 2015 and 2021. Even with the generous ratings, 53 of the 73 drugs (roughly 73 percent) were categorized as low-benefit. Collectively, these low-benefit drugs accounted for $15.9 billion of the ad spending. The top three low-benefit drugs by dollar amount were Dulaglutide (type 2 diabetes), Varenicline (smoking cessation), and Tofacitinib (rheumatoid arthritis). The outlook for change is bleak, the authors note. "Policy makers and regulators could consider limiting direct-to-consumer advertising to drugs with high therapeutic or public health value or requiring standardized disclosure of comparative effectiveness and safety data," Kesselheim and his colleagues concluded, "but policy changes would likely require industry cooperation or face constitutional challenge." The report notes that the U.S. is "one of only two countries that allows direct-to-consumer (DTC) drug advertisements, such as TV commercials." The other is New Zealand.

"I saw the future at CES 2023," writes Geoffrey Morrison, describing "a new, top-secret prototype display technology" that could one day replace LCD and OLED for phones and TVs. "It was impossibly flat, like a vibrantly glowing piece of paper."

Meet electroluminescent quantum dots: Until now, quantum dots were always a supporting player in another technology's game. A futuristic booster for older tech, elevating that tech's performance. QDs weren't a character on their own. That is no longer the case. The prototype I saw was completely different. No traditional LEDs and no OLED. Instead of using light to excite quantum dots into emitting light, it uses electricity. Nothing but quantum dots. Electroluminescent, aka direct-view, quantum dots. This is huge.

Or at least, has the potential to be huge. Theoretically, this will mean thinner, more energy-efficient displays. It means displays that can be easier, as in cheaper, to manufacture. That could mean even less expensive, more efficient, bigger-screen TVs. The potential in picture quality is at least as good as QD-OLED, if not better. The tech is scalable from tiny, lightweight, high-brightness displays for next-generation VR headsets, to highly efficient phone screens, to high-performance flat-screen TVs.
The article predicts the simpler structure means "Essentially, you can print an entire QD display onto a surface without the heat required by other 'printable' tech.... Just about any flat or curved surface could be a screen." This leads to QD screens not just on TVs and phones, but on car windshields, eyeglass lenses, and even bus or subway windows. ("These will initially be pitched by cities as a way to show people important info, but inevitably they'll be used for advertising. That's certainly not a knock against the tech, just how things work in the world....")

Nanosys is calling this direct-view, electroluminescent quantum dot tech "nanoLED," and told CNET that "their as-yet-unnamed manufacturing partner is going to be talking more about the technology in a few months...

"Even Nanosys admits direct-view quantum dot displays are still several years away from mass production.... But 5-10 years from now we'll almost certainly have options for QD [quantum dot] displays in our phones, probably in our living rooms, and possibly on our windshields and windows."

Congress can find common ground on the protection of privacy, competition and American children, says U.S. President Joe Biden. In an op-ed at Wall Street Journal, he shares why he has pushed for legislation to hold Big Tech accountable. From the start of his administration, says Biden, he has embraced three broad principles for reform: First, we need serious federal protections for Americans' privacy. That means clear limits on how companies can collect, use and share highly personal data -- your internet history, your personal communications, your location, and your health, genetic and biometric data. It's not enough for companies to disclose what data they're collecting. Much of that data shouldn't be collected in the first place. These protections should be even stronger for young people, who are especially vulnerable online. We should limit targeted advertising and ban it altogether for children.

Second, we need Big Tech companies to take responsibility for the content they spread and the algorithms they use. That's why I've long said we must fundamentally reform Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects tech companies from legal responsibility for content posted on their sites. We also need far more transparency about the algorithms Big Tech is using to stop them from discriminating, keeping opportunities away from equally qualified women and minorities, or pushing content to children that threatens their mental health and safety.

Third, we need to bring more competition back to the tech sector. My administration has made strong progress in promoting competition throughout the economy, consistent with my July 2021 executive order. But there is more we can do. When tech platforms get big enough, many find ways to promote their own products while excluding or disadvantaging competitors -- or charge competitors a fortune to sell on their platform. My vision for our economy is one in which everyone -- small and midsized businesses, mom-and-pop shops, entrepreneurs -- can compete on a level playing field with the biggest companies. To realize that vision, and to make sure American tech keeps leading the world in cutting-edge innovation, we need fairer rules of the road. The next generation of great American companies shouldn't be smothered by the dominant incumbents before they have a chance to get off the ground.

"France's data protection authority, CNIL, fined Apple €8 million (about $8.5 million) Wednesday," reports Gizmodo, "for illegally harvesting iPhone owners' data for targeted ads without proper consent." It's an unusual sanction for the iPhone maker, which has faced fewer legal penalties over privacy than its Big Tech competitors. Apple makes privacy a selling point for its devices, plastering "Privacy. That's iPhone." across 40-foot billboards across the world.... Apple failed to "obtain the consent of French iPhone users (iOS 14.6 version) before depositing and/or writing identifiers used for advertising purposes on their terminals," the CNIL said in a statement. The CNIL's fine calls out the search ads in Apple's App Store, specifically. A French court fined the company over $1 million in December over its commercial practices related to the App Store....

With iPhones running iOS 14.6 and below, Apple's Personalized Advertising privacy setting was turned on by default, leaving users to seek out the control on their own if they wanted to protect their information. That violates EU privacy law, according to the CNIL.... The newer versions of the iPhone operating system corrected the problem, presenting users with a prompt before the advertising data was collected. Gizmodo also notes this response from an Apple spokesperson. "We are disappointed with this decision given the CNIL has previously recognized that how we serve search ads in the App Store prioritizes user privacy, and we will appeal. Apple Search Ads goes further than any other digital advertising platform we are aware of by providing users with a clear choice as to whether or not they would like personalized ads."

Gizmodo calls France's fine "a signal that Apple may face a less friendly regulatory future in Europe."

"Singaporean inventor and tech pioneer Sim Wong Hoo passed away on January 4th at the age of 67," reports Engadget: Sim may not be a household name these days, but he founded Creative Technology (or Creative Labs in the US), the company behind the Sound Blaster brand of sound cards, back in 1981. Sound Blasters were some of the first sound cards available to consumers, and there was a time when you had to make sure your system worked with them if you wanted to listen to music and play games.

Sim established his business in the US and started selling Sound Blasters a few years later, after which Creative became the first Singaporean company to be listed on the Nasdaq exchange. The integration of sound boards into the motherboard ended Sound Blaster's popularity, but Bloomberg says the cards provided audio for more than 400 million PCs.

Under his leadership, Creative also launched a range of MP3 players, and Sim once tried to take on Apple by spending $100 million on advertising and marketing in its bid to dethrone the iPod. In 2006, Creative sued Apple for violating its patent for portable media system menus. The companies filed more lawsuits against each other after that before Apple settled with Creative and paid the company $100 million for the technology outlined in its patent.

"We are seeing, across the gamut, products that impact our privacy, products that create cybersecurity risks, that have overarchingly long-term environmental impacts, disposable products, and flat-out just things that maybe should not exist."

That's the CEO of the how-to repair site iFixit, introducing their third annual "Worst in Show" ceremony for the products displayed at this year's CES. But the show's slogan promises it's also "calling out the most troubling trends in tech." For example, the EFF's executive director started with two warnings. First, "If it's communicating with your phone, it's generally communicating to the cloud too." But more importantly, if a product is gathering data about you and communicating with the cloud, "you have to ask yourself: is this company selling something to me, or are they selling me to other people? And this year, as in many past years at CES, it's almost impossible to tell from the products and the advertising copy around them! They're just not telling you what their actual business model is, and because of that — you don't know what's going on with your privacy."

After warning about the specific privacy implications of a urine-analyzing add-on for smart toilets, they noted there was a close runner-up for the worst privacy: the increasing number of scam products that "are basically based on the digital version of phrenology, like trying to predict your emotions based upon reading your face or other things like that. There's a whole other category of things that claim to do things that they cannot remotely do."

To judge the worst in show by environmental impact, Consumer Reports sent the Associate Director for their Product Sustainability, Research and Testing team, who chose the 55-inch portable "Displace TV" for being powered only by four lithium-ion batteries (rather than, say, a traditional power cord).

And the "worst in show" award for repairability went to the Ember Mug 2+ — a $200 travel mug "with electronics and a battery inside...designed to keep your coffee hot." Kyle Wiens, iFixit's CEO, first noted it was a product which "does not need to exist" in a world which already has equally effective double-insulated, vaccuum-insulated mugs and Thermoses. But even worse: it's battery powered, and (at least in earlier versions) that battery can't be easily removed! (If you email the company asking for support on replacing the battery, Wiens claims that "they will give you a coupon on a new, disposable coffee mug. So this is the kind of product that should not exist, doesn't need to exist, and is doing active harm to the world.

"The interesting thing is people care so much about their $200 coffee mug, the new feature is 'Find My iPhone' support. So not only is it harming the environment, it's also spying on where you're located!"

The founder of SecuRepairs.org first warned about "the vast ecosystem of smart, connected products that are running really low-quality, vulnerable software that make our persons and our homes and businesses easy targets for hackers." But for the worst in show for cybersecurity award, they then chose Roku's new Smart TV, partly because smart TVs in general "are a problematic category when it comes to cybersecurity, because they're basically surveillance devices, and they're not created with security in mind." And partly because to this day it's hard to tell if Roku has fixed or even acknowledged its past vulnerabilities — and hasn't implemented a prominent bug bounty program. "They're not alone in this. This is a problem that affects electronics makers of all different shapes and sizes at CES, and it's something that as a society, we just need to start paying a lot more attention to."

And US Pirg's "Right to Repair" campaign director gave the "Who Asked For This" award to Neutrogena's "SkinStacks" 3D printer for edible skin-nutrient gummies — which are personalized after phone-based face scans. ("Why just sell vitamins when you could also add in proprietary refills and biometic data harvesting.")

Companies like Apple have moved hardware production to places like India and Vietnam, reports the Washington Post. But Facebook "has hit walls, say three people familiar with the discussions, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe internal conversations." Until recently, the people said, Meta executives viewed the company's reliance on China to make Oculus virtual reality headsets as a relatively minor concern because the company's core focus was its social media and messaging apps. All that has changed now that Meta has rebranded itself as a hardware company, the people said. Beyond last year's name change from Facebook to Meta, the company has undertaken a broad internal reorganization, launched augmented-reality smart glasses, and is building a connected device that could be worn on a person's wrist. In October, the company introduced Meta Quest Pro, the first in a new line of headsets built for collaboration.

Internal concerns about the hardware push intensified last year, when some executives worried that the anti-China strategy...would hurt its business ambitions and be viewed by the public and regulators as hypocritical, given the company's growing reliance on China for its plans....

Executives also looked, unsuccessfully, for ways to move manufacturing of Oculus to Taiwan. "Meta is building a complicated hardware product. You can't just turn on a dime and make it elsewhere," said one of the executives.... While the original smartwatch plan was abandoned, the company continues to work on a wearable device for the wrist, according to two people familiar with the company's plans. "At present, Meta's consumer electronics hardware is manufactured in China but we are constantly reviewing and exploring supply chain opportunities around the world," spokeswoman Ha Thai said....

Executives are still hoping the hardware-focused rebranding will shift the conversation away from criticism of its social media business, said two of the people. But they are well aware that relying on China for a growing suite of virtual reality headsets, smartwatches and other hardware will invite a new set of political challenges. Companies dependent on China for manufacturing have faced criticism over shipping jobs overseas as well as environmental and labor rights issues, and have had their businesses impacted by trade wars and other political escalations.

"You trade in one set of problems for another," said one of the people.
The article also notes that Meta has quietly funded the nonprofit "American Edge" that "runs online advertising and other campaigns that are critical of China and of TikTok, the Chinese-owned social media app.

"[S]ome Chinese analysts have argued that Meta was resorting to desperate measures because it feared TikTok owner ByteDance's growing dominance in short video."

We're buying more things online, the Washington Post notes. But how we buy may be changing too: For the first time in years, Google and Meta have grabbed less than half of the digital marketing money spent in the United States in 2022. Amazon, which took more than 11 percent of all digital ads purchased, was the biggest reason Google and Meta lost ground as advertising powerhouses, according to the research firm Insider Intelligence.

In part because of Amazon's success with paid product promotions, Walmart, Target, the grocery delivery company Instacart, drugstore chain Walgreens and other retailers are also putting a higher priority on tailoring commercials to influence what you buy, advertising specialists said. Another reason these ads are spreading is that retailers' knowledge of what you buy is valuable, especially now that there are more limitations on how internet powers such as Facebook can follow everything you do to target you with ads.

Like Google and Facebook, stores are trying to use as much information as they can find about you to steer your choices. One difference from Google and Facebook is that retailers like Amazon and Walmart make money from influencing what you buy and from selling you the product.

The thing is ... these ads seem to work on you. And that's why paid product persuasion is likely here to stay.

In an advertisement on Facebook and Instagram, a middle-aged man holding a dumbbell says testosterone "literally changed my life," restoring his energy and happiness. What the October ad from telehealth startup Hone Health doesn't say is that the unidentified man is an actor who has never used the prescription drug. From a report: It doesn't mention that testosterone is approved by the Food and Drug Administration only for men with specific disorders and that among its risks are heart attacks and stroke. Similar telehealth companies are flooding TikTok, Instagram and other platforms with ads that don't conform to longtime standards governing the marketing of prescription drugs and healthcare treatments. They feature actors posing as customers, tout benefits of drugs with no mention of side effects and promote medications for uses not approved by the FDA.

Since the pandemic, online advertising has drawn hundreds of thousands of people to telehealth companies such as Cerebral and Done for treatment of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, anxiety and other medical conditions. Some employees and patients have said their marketing practices contributed to the abuse of controlled substances. In a four-week period spanning October and November, about 20 companies ran more than 2,100 ads on Facebook and Instagram that described benefits of prescription drugs without citing risks, promoted drugs for unapproved uses or featured testimonials without disclosing whether they came from actors or company employees, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis of ads collected by the nonprofit Algorithmic Transparency Institute from Meta Platforms' ad library.

France's privacy watchdog fined Microsoft $64 million for not offering clear enough instruction for users to reject cookies used for online ads, as part of the move to enforce Europe's tightening data protection law. From a report: CNIL, France's digital privacy regulator, said Thursday that it carried out several investigations on the Microsoft search engine Bing in September 2020 and May 2021 and found that the site dropped advertising cookies in users' terminals without their explicit consent.

The website also lacked a button for users to reject cookies as simply as accepting them, CNIL said, where two clicks were required to refuse all cookies while only one was needed to accept them. Cookies are small files that track and monitor the sites users have visited and are often used to help personalize online ads. According to CNIL, the $64 million fine against Microsoft is justified partly because of the scope of revenue the company made from advertising indirectly generated from the data collected via cookies.

®Yahoo co-founder Jerry Yang (through his AME Cloud Ventures) contributed to $6 million in seed funding in November for startup Caden, which plans to pay users to share their personal data -- including what they buy or watch on mobile apps.

The Wall Street Journal reports: The startup, Caden Inc., operates an app by the same name that helps users download their data from apps and servicesâ"whether thatâ(TM)s Amazon.com Inc. or Airbnb Inc. â"into a personal âoevault.â Users who consent to share that data for advertising purposes can earn a cut of the revenue that the app generates from it. They also can access personal analytics based on that data....

Caden, which has been testing with a limited group of users, plans to begin a public beta test of 10,000 users early next year.... One option in the public beta test will anonymize and pool the data before sharing it with outside parties in exchange for $5 to $20 a month, according to Caden founder and Chief Executive John Roa. The amount of compensation will be determined by a âoedata scoreâ reflecting factors such as whether consumers answer demographic survey questions and which apps and servicesâ(TM) data consumers are sharing. Consumers will eventually be given the option to share more specific information for more tailored advertising. A marketer could then form audience segments and tailor their ad targeting and messaging to those groups. For instance, a user could consent to sharing his ride-share history so advertisers could create segments of people who ride a certain amount. That would eventually pay consumers up to $50 a month, Caden said.

A third option would let advertisers take a direct action based on the data that Caden understands about a specific user. If a consumer were part of a department storeâ(TM)s loyalty program, for example, the store might reward her for sharing her individual Amazon shopping history and use it to provide more personalized offers.ÂThat could generate thousands of dollars a year for participating users, the company said.

 Caden also hopes that the data it can aggregate will be compelling for consumers. Users could search for restaurants theyâ(TM)ve eaten at in a certain city, for instance, or how much they spent in certain categories across different apps, executives said. âoeItâ(TM)s like Spotify Wrapped for your whole life,â said Amarachi Miller, Cadenâ(TM)s head of product, referring to the streaming music serviceâ(TM)s year-end distillation of each userâ(TM)s listening....

Caden said it will initially sell only anonymized and aggregated data that doesnâ(TM)t tie back to individuals. As it starts to let brands do more personal promotions for users, it said it will let users see which brands and partners itâ(TM)s working with, and will let users control which brands can access their information.
The digital ad industry has been seeking new marketing-guiding data, the article points out, especially since Apple began require apps to ask for permission before tracking users.

Thanks to Slashdot reader guest reader for sharing the article.

Satya Nadella keeps thinking bigger. Microsoft's chief executive has been buying new businesses at an impressive clip. Look for him to add Netflix to the list in 2023. Reuters reports: [...] The two companies are already closely aligned. Netflix chose Microsoft as its advertising partner for a new advertising-supported subscription service. Microsoft President Brad Smith also sits on the Netflix board. Part of the rationale for a deal is that Microsoft wants to offer a video-game streaming service over multiple devices. Netflix has its own big plans in gaming. In 2022, the company co-led by Reed Hastings snapped up developer Spry Fox, its sixth in-house studio. Becoming part of the Microsoft empire would supercharge those ambitions. A bundle with streaming TV and games together is not hard to fathom.

With a market value 13 times that of Netflix, as of early December, $1.8 trillion Microsoft can afford Netflix. A 30% premium would value the Netflix enterprise at nearly $190 billion. Significant cost savings would be hard to find, however. And after taxing the $8 billion of operating profit that analysts project for Netflix in 2024, the implied return on investment would only be half its 8% weighted average cost of capital, per Morningstar analysts. Nadella has defied such back-of-the-envelope financial logic before. And if nothing else, he has shown a willingness to be a bold dealmaker. On that basis, it's easy to believe Microsoft will set its sights on Netflix.

"Peak TV has peaked," reports the new York Times: The never-ending supply of new programming that helped define the streaming era — spawning shows at a breakneck pace but also overwhelming viewers with too many choices — appears to finally be slowing. The number of adult scripted series ordered by TV networks and streaming companies aimed for U.S. audiences fell by 24 percent in the second half of this year, compared with the same period last year, according to Ampere Analysis, a research firm. Compared with 2019, it is a 40 percent drop. "The second half of the year has really gone off a bit of a cliff," said Fred Black, a research manager at Ampere.

It may take some time for that to become apparent to viewers — if it becomes apparent at all, given the glut. It is usually months and sometimes more than a year for a TV show to premiere after a network orders it.

The drop is a result of broader reckoning inside the entertainment industry. For years, television executives tossed off billions of dollars on TV series to help build out their streaming services and chase subscribers. The spending has been a boon to high-profile writers and producers, who captured eight- and nine-figure deals, as well as for the actors, directors and behind-the-scenes workers who kept the engine going. But Wall Street soured on the buy-at-any-cost strategy starting in the spring, when Netflix, the streaming powerhouse, announced that it had lost subscribers for the first time in a decade. Netflix's stock nose-dived, and other entertainment companies soon watched their share prices fall, too. Hollywood companies quickly shifted, putting a new emphasis on higher profits instead of raw subscriber counts.

Then, in recent months, entertainment companies became increasingly anxious about a slowing economy, the cord-cutting movement and a troublesome advertising market. Since the summer, scores of executives have abruptly been dismissed, strict cost-cutting measures have been adopted and layoffs have taken hold throughout the industry.... Netflix also cut hundreds of jobs and introduced a cheaper advertising tier, overturning the company's longtime pledge to never allow commercials on the service. Warner Bros. Discovery, a company that was formed in April, faces a debt of roughly $50 billion, and has been in severe cost-cutting mode. There have been rounds of layoffs companywide, including at HBO and HBO Max, as well as sudden cancellations. The once-popular series "Westworld" was canceled last month — a move that surprised Hollywood — and the lesser-known, raunchy dating series "FBoy Island" was cut a few weeks ago....

There are a few outliers to this year's trend: Apple TV+ and Amazon have increased the number of adult scripted series they have purchased this year. So has Disney, according to Ampere's research. (For the second half of the year, however, Disney's buying has declined compared with the same period last year.)

The European Union took a significant step toward completing a deal with the U.S. that would allow personal information about Europeans to be stored legally on U.S. soil, reducing the threat of regulatory action against thousands of companies that routinely transmit such information. From a report: The European Commission, the EU's executive arm, on Tuesday published a draft approval of the preliminary deal it struck in March with the U.S. government. The agreement would re-establish a framework that makes it easy for businesses to transfer such information again following the invalidation of a previous agreement by an EU court in 2020.

As part of the new deal, the U.S. is offering -- and has started to implement -- new safeguards on how its intelligence authorities can access that data. If concluded, the deal could resolve one of the thorniest outstanding issues between the two economic giants. Hanging in the balance has been the ability of businesses to use U.S.-based data centers to do things such as sell online ads, measure their website traffic or manage company payroll in Europe. Blocking data transfers could upend billions of dollars of trade from cross-border data activities, including cloud services, human resources, marketing and advertising, if they involve sending or storing information about Europeans on U.S. soil, tech advocates say.