Industry experts have largely welcomed Google’s delay in phasing out third-party cookies, however some warn that the extended deadline could slow innovation.
Last Friday, the tech giant announced that third-party cookies would now be phased out by the end of 2023, saying it needed more time to work with regulators and the industry to develop new tools in its Privacy Sandbox to replace cookies.
Experts tell AdNews the move is largely a positive one, and that the industry should use the extra time to improve their tools and strategy for a post-cookie world.
“The extended timeline gives the industry an opportunity to more thoroughly and calmly consider approaches to addressable advertising,” says Xandr product management vice president Ewa Maciukiewicz.
“There are many questions about the currently proposed solutions concerning feasibility and privacy that still need to be answered. Rushing any solution that may not address consumer concerns around privacy would be no better than the third-party cookie status quo, so this gives everyone the opportunity to refocus and proceed at a responsible pace.”
However, others such as M&C Saatchi Group AUNZ chief data officer James Collier, add that the delay could disrupt the race to find alternative solutions to third-party cookies.
“Yes, there is more time, but near term deadlines create urgency,” Collier tells AdNews.
“We've moved from having six months of runway to 2+ years. That breathing room could be a momentum killer.”
Here’s what others had to say:
Dentsu national head of programmatic James Gernon
I must admit that it’s a surprise to see Google extend their initial deadline, especially considering the speed at which Apple are rolling out their iOS privacy standards, but seeing some of the many solutions being looked, particularly Google’s FLoC and The Trade Desk’s Unified ID 2.0, I think it’s clear that more time is needed.
Is the delay frustrating?
Not at all, third party cookies are not fit for purpose and I think the initial announcement got us all talking about an issue that needed to be solved eventually. We’ve taken brilliant strides helping our clients understand the impact that this will have across their digital media investments and it’s led to some amazing conversations about measurement and how we can help in future proofing their businesses. We’ve been speaking about our own identity solution M1 for some time now with clients and the work I’m seeing is some of the best I’ve experienced throughout my career across multiple agencies.
Is this overall good news?
I certainly believe so, privacy and transparency of how people’s data is used is so important to us as an agency and we want to be more actively involved in these solutions, whether that’s even more testing of what’s out in market, testing new solutions that surface or helping shape these, but importantly we must be the face of our clients and making sure their voices are heard too. It felt like the solutions in question aren’t quite there yet so I think we need to get it right, rather than pulling the plug with any uncertainty.
Is there any harm in delaying the phase out of third-party cookies?
As Google called out, they want to consider the performance of their advertiser, agency and publisher partners and balance that with the privacy needs of the open internet. This is a very different approach than what we’ve seen from Apple who have been moving at pace and we’re still learning how each of the iOS privacy changes impact advertisers and consumers alike.
Does the delay just leave people in the industry feeling uncertain?
I wouldn’t say there is uncertainty or confusion, I think our industry will keep making strides to find solutions that work for all parties involved. This delay means that we’ve got more time to educate and talk about what it means for the brands we work with and to help them understand what we’re doing to help them overcome this.
Does it give you more time to try other options you might not have had time for before?
We’re already working incredibly closely with Google, Facebook and The Trade Desk on their unique solutions and it’s great to see how far they’ve come in such a short space of time. I think it’ll be interesting to see if those tech giants in particular keep working within their walled gardens. It’ll also be interesting to see if other parties come up with any great options; you only have to look as far as Amazon to wonder if they’ll create something, or even some of the big publishers.
M&C Saatchi Group AUNZ chief data officer James Collier
I'm not really surprised by the delay. There have been some big questions asked of Google's flagship post-cookie targeting solution, FLOC, that still appear to go unanswered. Questions around its claimed effectiveness, questions around Europe's exclusion from the origin trial, questions around how FLOC could supercharge fingerprinting. Add that to accelerating privacy reform in the US and Amazon allegedly blocking FLOC across some of it's websites and something needed to give. Looks like it was the timeline.
Is there any harm in delaying the phase out of third-party cookies?
Google's decision to remove third-party cookies is just one of a number of digital identity challenges the industry is facing. The benefit of a January 2022 deadline was it created certainty of change and prioritised third-party cookies in the eyes of the industry. With the delay we now find ourselves looking at three highly disruptive events and some real uncertainty around where we should start. First, we have the government's intention to pursue privacy reform. Second, we have Apple's recent announcement around 'iCloud Private Relay' and 'Hide My Email' which create real questions around the long-term efficacy of hashed email based identity solutions and first-party data matching. Finally, we have the removal of third-party cookies. We're in the ring with three Mike Tysons right now, so probably time to prepare for at least a little pain!
Does the delay change your approach to preparing for third-party cookies?
I hope the industry uses the reprieve it's been given to develop more flexible and interoperable solutions. Solutions that can, if needed, bend to unforeseen regulatory or technology changes. If the last couple of weeks tell us anything, it's that everything can change and months, if not years worth of work can be thrown into disarray courtesy of a blog post! It really is big tech’s world and we just live in it.
James Collier
Tug founder and CEO Nick Beck
I'm not at all surprised by the delay. Too many business models, still unprepared for change, have been built on the cookie, and it of course drives a large portion of Google’s revenue. Current solutions for the cookie’s replacement show promise, but a year out from the original sunsetting date there are no stand outs. The industry has accepted the eventual demise of the cookie though, and examples like Apple’s new explicit permission-based iOS14 and Brave’s new privacy focused browser, show that we are already well on our way.
Is there any harm in delaying the phase out of third-party cookies?
The short answer is no. However, some people in the industry wonder if the delay is simply due to Google’s own unpreparedness. For example their solution FLoC, which groups like minded consumers into anonymous cohorts, still runs afoul of Europe’s GDPR requirements. Google may just be buying time while they find a way to maintain their dominance.
Does the delay just leave people in the industry feeling uncertain?
There was already a level of uncertainty and that remains. However, it does give everyone more time to develop measurement solutions and try to find some consensus. The industry will be sceptical with Google’s next confirmed date for the sunsetting of cookies though, could the date be moved again?
Outbrain APAC and growth markets MD Andrew Burke
I don’t think there’s any need for people to be frustrated - all this is doing is delaying the inevitable while some parts of the industry get their plans together. For those advertisers that have already done the groundwork there’s only upside to this - they get to spend more time honing their tactics and testing different tools with the safety net of the old way of doing things. And let’s not forget a lot of other services have already phased out cookies or equivalent, so those advertisers looking at alternative solutions, such as contextual advertising, are going to be ahead of the game.
Is the delay good news?
It’s good news because it does give those who need it more time to test and learn - the more marketers who are ready the less disruption there will be. But it’s only good news if people do really commit to getting fit for what the internet will look like in 2023 post-cookies. We’re already working with a lot of clients to help them understand the opportunities to go a lot deeper and be a lot more connected with audiences, and understand their behaviours properly.
Is there any harm in delaying the phase out of third-party cookies?
The only harm will come from those who abuse and misuse cookies and continue to irritate the end users of the internet. At the end of the day we’re all consumers as well, and you know how annoying badly targeted ads can be for our trust in advertising.
Does the delay leave people in the industry feeling uncertain?
It would be great to have a firm date to work towards - Google has moved the goalposts a couple of times now for marketers, and so I think it’s time they set a firm target to give everyone in the industry clarity on what will happen, and when. The only way to really combat any lingering confusion or uncertainty out there is for real concerted education and plain-English explanations of what is happening, and why. A lot of vendors in this sector often disappear up their own backside when it comes to talking about these products, throwing out acronyms and jargon like confetti, when all most marketers want is a plain English explanation. It doesn’t have to be that complicated, and I think a lot of advertisers will end up looking for suppliers who can explain things simply and effectively, because those are the ones who get it.
It’s really important advertisers understand this is just a delay to the inevitable. Cookies are going to go away - which in the long run will be better. So if you haven’t done so already, it’s time to get out there and test different strategies. If you don’t you’ll risk becoming a slave to the walled garden platforms, and miss out on the massive opportunities with real trusted publisher content on the open web.
Xandr product management VP Ewa Maciukiewicz
As a technology platform and facilitator of digital advertising transactions, Xandr has a responsibility to contribute to a healthier ecosystem built on best practices, collaboration and trusted, secure user experiences. This gives us the opportunity to take a step back, take stock of our current offerings and market position and reconsider our leadership role in shaping the future of advertising. Google itself is acknowledging that they need more time to figure out what's best for the long-term, showing just how complex the identity challenge really is.
Frontier Australia commercial director & head of strategy Dan O’Brien
Working mainly with SMBs, we are finding our clients are at varying stages of preparation and to be honest, some do need more time to properly prepare for what is a significant project. Some are building first-party data capabilities from scratch which involves internal stakeholders beyond marketing alone. This news will be well received and hopefully pushes pockets of the industry to accelerate preparation.
Is the delay frustrating?
Despite all the work to get to this point, I still prefer to look at this delay as a positive. It simply gives us all more time to make sure that our solutions are reliable and scalable, and we are as ready as we can be when the cookie jar is emptied.
IAB Australia technology lead Jonas Jaanimagi
Instinctively, I am surprised by the delay, but after some consideration I shouldn’t have been. As a company one has to give credit to Google for being prepared to openly and publicly own up to miscalculating sometimes. Learning from product failures such as Google+, Orkut or Google Wave all immediately spring to mind - as does this decision to extend a significant timeline for all concerned. The combined pressures of an aggressive timeline for full and collaborative testing, increased scrutiny from European regulators and growing reluctance from some large private eco-systems to contribute to FLoCs, have all played their part in Google being prepared to admit that the initial timelines proved untenable and announced a rethink. Ultimately this approach has to be applauded. Supporting both publishers and advertisers through the delay will have been a critical driver, but ultimately since Google are now working directly with regulators such as the UK’s Competition and Markets Authority on tracking capabilities in Chrome post cookie deprecation, the regulatory pressures may have been a more powerful driver – particularly for the length of the announced delay.
Is the delay overall good news?
We believe it is, yes. This additional time will now enable the industry to more fully collaborate on developing the appropriate solutions and framework for consumers, advertisers and publishers – and for the industry to genuinely consider all perspectives, inputs and future scenarios. This can only be a good thing and will ensure that we can responsibly protect consumers moving forwards, whilst also maximising technical creativity, widening the diversity and scale of proposals and enhancing commercial competition.
Does the delay leave people in the industry feeling uncertain?
If any members of the industry are even more confused by this news then we can only recommend reviewing all of the content, webinars and documentation IAB Australia have been producing and sharing on this topic over the last 18 months. We have advised our members to not ignore this issue and treat it as a long-term problem for others to resolve, but to still plan ahead competently and responsibly. This should also include not halting any testing and a reduction of investment in this area – and to continue collaborating with all commercial partners and technical vendors. This delay now gives everyone the time to prepare even more competently, thoroughly test and to also incorporate into these strategic efforts the requirements now driven by some of the recent changes by Apple's ATT feature as well as the forthcoming changes in iOS15.
Index Exchange president and CEO Andrew Casale
While the delay does not come as a surprise, the length of the delay does. Ever since Google announced its plans for Privacy Sandbox, more questions than answers have been prompted. In order to survive, publishers need viable options. We welcome the additional time, and our work to solve for a privacy-first world will not stop because of it.
Is the delay good news?
This delay gives every stakeholder the necessary time to scale privacy-first approaches to addressability, ones that will provide lasting benefits to all stakeholders. As an industry, we shouldn’t wait to edge closer to yet another deadline. The work must continue now.
Does the delay leave people in the industry feeling uncertain?
Ultimately, this announcement shouldn’t cause any confusion or uncertainty in the ecosystem. From our perspective nothing changes, and publishers and buyers should continue their work and collaboration with partners that can bring addressable solutions to the forefront.
Lotame CEO Andy Monfried
I'm not surprised by the delay. Google had already agreed to give the CMA in the UK some control over the date of transition, which made a delay almost a certainty. It also was becoming evident that Google was going to have to either delay or provide a tangible commitment to interoperate with identity solutions that aren’t its own. What is surprising is the length of the delay. Considering the very long runway, there’s reasonable concern that Google is still holding onto the hope that it can provide a proprietary-only identity solution; it won’t have to interoperate with any other; and that it wants plenty of time to orchestrate that outcome.
Is the delay frustrating?
No. The industry was racing towards a solution and many were not prepared. There was considerable risk to the bottom line of publishers and advertisers. The delay gives those businesses more time to learn, test, and determine the best suite of solutions to improve monetization, prospecting, performance, and more. For Lotame, we're thinking bigger than just browsers and third-party cookies, so while a delay may be helpful from a time and resource perspective, it doesn't materially change our strategy or plans in any meaningful way.
Is the delay good news?
It certainly gives those that were behind on testing more time. As I mentioned earlier, it could be very bad news for the open web if Google plans to use the time to develop and pursue its single-lane identity solution that isn’t open and interoperable with the rest of the internet.
Is there any harm in delaying the phase out of third-party cookies?
Cookies are inefficient and expensive. The harm is the longer the delay, the longer the industry sustains the higher cost of continuing to use an obsolete technology, with greater costs for syncing cookies, lower efficiency of identity-based activation, and greater time to realize a return for those who have invested in new technologies. As an ecosystem, we must continue to work together to prevent data leakage and solve for accountable and transparent consumer privacy.
Does the delay leave people in the industry feeling uncertain?
Certainly. Everyone is left wondering: “Will there be more delays?” “Will Google ever deprecate cookies?” Listen, at the end of the day, we still need to solve for consumer privacy. We still need to find solutions to achieve a single view of the consumer across browsers, devices and connected platforms. The marching orders are clear.
Google’s accommodation stands as further proof that identity – which has been used in marketing for 100 years – is not going to disappear from digital marketing. The technology will be better: more open, more accountable, more transparent, but also more efficient and more effective. There has been a chorus of Luddite voices saying, “This is the end of identity and the future is context.” Context is useful in certain use cases, but better applications of newer technologies are the future.
Verizon Media AUNZ head of data Dan Richardson
I am surprised by the delay. Pleasantly. The bottom line is that Google wasn’t ready. Google recognised that its own solutions will not yet be ready for its original deprecation timeline, so delaying was the inevitable outcome. Google will continue to invest in its Privacy Sandbox initiative. Google is also facing significant headwinds from antitrust investigations and large publishers such as Amazon who are backing their first-party data over Google’s proposed FLoCs and blocking the code from their website.
Is it frustrating that after working so hard to prepare for the end of third-party cookies there’s now a delay?
Not at all. We’re pretty used to the goal posts being moved. I think this is a big opportunity for marketers, publishers and tech to get this right. The reality is it takes a great deal of time to create a customer data strategy that is not reliant on cookies or mobile AdIDs. This means investment in privacy, security, website tagging, evaluating new Identity partners or getting your head around the next generation of contextual targeting solutions. And that’s just part of
the puzzle.
Dan Richardson
Does the delay leave people in the industry feeling uncertain?
We need to remember that privacy is at the core of these changes. Or at least it’s meant to be, versus just an internet land grab by Google. Consumers need to be informed and involved in the process. The first step is addressing the gaping data education gap with consumers - 79% are unaware of changes to third-party tracking cookies, data privacy, and AdIDs. Furthermore, 76% of consumers would like sites/apps to explain why they are asking for personal information, and the value for them as an end user. The second consideration needs to be building a data strategy that moves beyond the transactional, e.g. just web based retargeting to actual relationship building. It needs to be an ongoing conversation with your customer that drives brand love. We know brand love comes in many forms, from pure discounts and offers to unique content, experiences or a sense of community. Brands and publishers alike now have more time to invest in this and move away from transactional or pop-up data collection events which have a limited shelf life, consent wise.
MIQ AUNZ CEO Jason Scott
The move gives the industry, including Google, more time and space to figure out the best combination of solutions that work for the specific goals of different advertisers.
Is the delay frustrating?
None of the work is wasted nor stops in terms of building solutions that involve both deterministic, authenticated data and scalable anonymous or cohort data across the open and closed web.
Is there any harm in delaying the phase out of third-party cookies?
We know from our testing to date that cookieless solutions can provide more scale, more intelligence and greater overall performance, all while providing stronger consumer privacy protections. This only proves that cookies are nearly past their time anyway; so in many ways, moves like this one from Google are not going to excessively slow down the development of alternatives.
Does the delay leave people in the industry feeling uncertain?
Morphing to a more modern approach to harness the opportunity that exists for marketers now given the software and hardware developments, consumer behaviour changes and addressable media options enabled by technology advancement, requires a fluid playbook. If you have a clear intent and good partners I think you are likely to be more excited than confused.
Does the delay change your approach to preparing for third-party cookies?
For advertisers and agencies wondering whether this move should alter their own strategy, our recommendation is to continue to press ahead with testing cookieless alternatives with your programmatic media partners, especially considering it may bring better campaign performance even before the change on Chrome finally happens.
Acoustic CMO Norman Guadagno
I’m not surprised that there was intense pushback from marketing and advertising players with Google’s original deadline, so in a way, I’m not surprised that there’s now been a delay. It’s critical for companies like Google, which have a massive reach and far-reaching implications for their policies, to evaluate the consequences of their decisions and consult with every part of the complex marketing and advertising ecosystem. Because this doesn’t seem to have happened originally, they’re now seeing pushback, requiring them to reevaluate.
Is the delay frustrating?
While Google’s delay may frustrate some marketers, we should already have practices in place that can help us mitigate this change. One of my colleagues refers to the use of cookies as “marketing on easy,” which I agree with. It’s certainly helpful, but by embracing creativity and innovation, we’ll be ready for the change, whenever it does happen.
Is the delay good news?
Other browsers like Safari and Firefox have already ended their support for third-party cookies, so hopefully marketers already have a “Plan B.” While it does give us more time to prepare, it also stagnates our innovation because it’s not as critical of a need now.
Is there any harm in delaying the phase out of third-party cookies?
The real harm is slowing our innovation as an industry. We have the ability to leverage first-party and zero-party data instead of relying on third-party data via cookies, so why not start using it from now? While Google has delayed the “death of cookies,” it’s still going to happen eventually. Let’s embrace this evolution from now so we’re prepared.
Does the delay change your approach to preparing for third-party cookies?
It doesn’t necessarily change our approach, but we will have the chance to test different alternatives over the next year and a half. However, I encourage marketers to start implementing solutions and measuring their success sooner than later. If you’re able to move away from third-party cookies prior to Google’s deadline, the transition will be even smoother for your team and your reporting.
Eyeota Australia head of brand solutions Trent Lloyd
The delay on timeline is not a surprise and was to be expected based upon FLoC's limited utility and slow momentum generally of the Sandbox in the w3c. Ultimately, this decision underscores the power publishers now have, and the vital importance that advertising-funded content has to the open web. The additional time allows us to deepen developments of our publisher-direct solutions to future-proof their revenues when cookieless does take hold, further advance our flexible and interoperable ID agnostic device graph Eyeota Translate, and to carefully prioritize our Universal IDs integrations.
Next & Co head of strategy Nick Grinberg
I’m not really surprised by the delay. It always seemed like a hard ask to align the needs of advertisers, users, regulators, etc. with a viable alternative within the originally stated timeframe. I would say that it would have been irresponsible for Google to make the switch based on their original timeline due to the lack of alignment on an alternative solution that meets the needs of all relevant stakeholders.
Is there any harm in delaying the phase out of third-party cookies?
It delays the inevitable. There is a ‘user-privacy driven’ status quo the industry needs to move towards and delays such as this can make it difficult to strategically plan for this. It also means that users of the Chrome browser are left with the same privacy-invasive solution for a little while longer.
Does the delay leave people in the industry feeling uncertain?
The trend towards user privacy and improved data governance has been on the horizon for a while. Whilst there may be some uncertainty about timing - there should be little confusion about where we are trying to go.
Does it give you more time to try other options you might not have had time for before?
Yes. There is a lot of time required for new ad tech to be developed and then tested by advertisers so this delay will help with that.
Oracle chief revenue officer, advertising & marketing cloud Mollie Spilman
It isn’t surprising that this has been delayed but the additional time will be useful. Advertisers, marketers or agencies should continue to focus on customer choice and building direct relationships that bring value to the customer, regardless of what the large platforms do.
Is this overall good news?
Many in the industry are breathing a little easier today but we shouldn’t take this as a signal to relax and slow down. We all need to keep up the pace together to meet business needs while addressing consumer demand for more data privacy, transparency and control.
Is there any harm in delaying the phase out of third-party cookies?
The third-party cookie has been used for much more than its original expected use case, and it has been time to create a more equitable and consumer-centric internet. Use this time as your impetus to start, or ramp up, your involvement in industry groups, to be a part of building the next generation of privacy-focused solutions. Work with your partners to test different approaches to ad targeting, email programs, and loyalty.
Have something to say on this? Share your views in the comments section below. Or if you have a news story or tip-off, drop us a line at adnews@yaffa.com.au
Sign up to the AdNews newsletter, like us on Facebook or follow us on Twitter for breaking stories and campaigns throughout the day.