Following on an announcement last August, a Google blog post released earlier this month elaborated on the company’s plan to limit insecure cross-site tracking. As they explain, they will soon begin “treating cookies that don’t include a SameSite label as first-party only, and requiring cookies labeled for third-party use to be accessed over HTTPS.” So, what does that mean?
In more simple terms, the company is moving to end third-party tracking of users’ online habits. Alphabet, Inc. plans to phase out Chrome support of third-party cookies—widely used tracking tools which enable advertisers to follow users from site to site—over the next two years.
Google claims it wants to provide better protection for users’ personal data, and this new initiative should accomplish that. I suspect, however, that there are other motives here, as well.
I’m not a cynical person by nature, and I applaud all efforts to protect personal data. Still, as creators of the most popular browser in the world (accounting for over 60% of the global web browser market), I would have expected Google to lead this charge.
In fact, Apple started blocking third-party cookies on its Safari web browser in 2017, and Mozilla Corp.’s Firefox followed suit last year. Plus, Microsoft just announced that its Edge browser, retooled to run on the same open source foundation as Chrome, is now in general release; it, too, blocks third-party cookies by default.
Google is not only the last one to the party, they’re actually putting off the rollout for another two years. If privacy is Google’s prime concern here, why wait?
Google Has More to Lose…and to Gain
In the same blog post mentioned above, Justin Schuh, Chrome’s Director of Engineering, went so far as to call out the competition for their dramatic and decisive approach to blocking third-party cookies. “We believe this has unintended consequences that can negatively impact both users and the web ecosystem,” he said. The “slow-and-steady” tack that Google is taking, he explained, will allow for the development of “viable alternatives” to third-party cookies.
In effect, it sounds like Google wants to squeeze as much benefit as it can out of the current system before tracking by third-party cookies disappears altogether. This is a smart move, given the bulk of Google’s revenue comes from its own digital advertising programs. It makes sense they would drag their feet to make sure replacement tools are in place.
Of course, NOT implementing cookie-blocking was never a real option for Google. Cookies began going the way of the dodo with the introduction of the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). This legislation made it easier for users to opt out of cookie-based ad-tracking.
I have no doubt we will be seeing many more mandates of this type going forward. Privacy concerns (and, let’s be honest, the accompanying legal threats) call for greater protection of the personal information we entrust to eCommerce companies. Here’s the problem, though: while we may curtail the reckless sharing of data with third parties, this may be a serious threat to would-be players that don’t have the clout of Google or Facebook.
Making third-party cookies obsolete poses the same sort of menace. In other words, by making it harder for smaller players to compete with Google, we run the risk of granting Google an even larger share of the market it already dominates.
Looking at the Long Term
If I had to guess, I’d venture that knowing they’re the market leader plays a sizeable role in Google’s long-term plan. They’re already the subject of uneasy rumblings about monopolies. Thus, being perceived as forcing a bunch of smaller guys out of business is not in Alphabet’s best interest.
In this case, stalling can work for Google. Even if we find no alternative to third-party cookies, Google could at least claim their approach gave smaller competitors a chance. By comparison, it also implies that Apple and Microsoft—two companies also accused of holding monopolies—don’t care for the little guys at all.
Working in fintech, I see privacy become a bigger issue all the time. No matter how freely we give out our information, we still have a right to say who gets it. Google deciding to phase out cookies is good for consumers in the long run. Their decision to do it gradually could either be seen as tossing the little guy a lifeline…or giving smaller competitors enough rope to hang themselves.
