Personalized Ad in Your Google Glass? Wearable Technology, Hands-Off Data Collection, and New Policy Imperative

Abstract

This study analyzes the increasing presence and capabilities of wearable computing devices in the cornucopia of personalized digital data. We argue that the institutional data practices typical of Google Glass will pose policy challenges and herald yet another dramatic shift to personalized data marketing. We also highlight the characteristics of Google's existing synergetic data practices that will shape the development of not only Google Glass, but also all subsequent wearable mobile devices in light of 360-degree data collection. The key organizing concept of our study is the disjuncture between (1) institutional and (2) policy forces in harnessing dual market mechanism, which frames how the new communication industry operates in the marketplace of ubiquitous personal advertising. We conclude by summarizing the three key areas of political-policy concern (privacy; anti-trust; and user competence) and suggest future solutions, with the discussion on the future of wearable computing practices related to the freedom of the human body.

Privacy in Doubt: An Empirical Investigation of Canadians' Knowledge of Corporate Data Collection and Usage Practices

“…This inability to avoid generating data is especially significant with respect to novel medical devices, such as contact-lens glucose monitors, since opting out of their use can have significant healthrelated repercussions (Park & Skoric, 2017). They also note that, currently, the only reliable way to preclude data collection-foregoing the use of a product or service-is untenable.…”

“…Park and Skoric (2017) describe such a solution as "imperative" with respect to wearable devices like Google Glass, with have especially far-reaching data collection capabilities (page 76). The Article 29 Working Party (WP29) in Europe proposes to require companies to allow users to withdraw data collection consent at any time without financial penalty or restriction on device capability (2014).…”

“…In order to avoid leaving a digital footprint, one would have to never use a credit card or a smartphone, browse the Internet and, as IoT becomes increasingly widespread, perhaps even turn on a light. This inability to avoid generating data is especially significant with respect to novel medical devices, such as contact-lens glucose monitors, since opting out of their use can have significant healthrelated repercussions (Park & Skoric, 2017).…”

“…The Article 29 Working Party (WP29) in Europe proposes to require companies to allow users to withdraw data collection consent at any time without financial penalty or restriction on device capability (2014). Park and Skoric (2017) describe such a solution as "imperative" with respect to wearable devices like Google Glass, with have especially far-reaching data collection capabilities (page 76). The FTC suggests the inclusion of QR codes on IoT devices to lead consumers to more in-depth information, set-up wizards that explain and select privacy settings, and dashboards that allow consumers to set up and revisit privacy preferences (Federal Trade Commission, 2015).…”

The SoLoMo customer journey: a review and research agenda

“…The amount of data that is being gathered from the wearable items could open an entirely new field for the consumer behavior analysis (Park & Skoric, 2015). Further research can explore the brands' intention to use the personal data generated from wearable items such as people's health condition such as someone's heart rate or levels of blood pressure.…”