Talk:Ghostery: Difference between revisions

	; Archives (Index) ;
	2013; 2015; 2017; 2018; 2019; 2020;
	This page is archived by ClueBot III.

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Latest revision as of 19:36, 14 February 2024

Marketing & Advertising Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Marketing & Advertising, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Marketing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Marketing & AdvertisingWikipedia:WikiProject Marketing & AdvertisingTemplate:WikiProject Marketing & AdvertisingMarketing & Advertising
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Computing: Software / Free and open-source software Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Software (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by Free and open-source software (assessed as Mid-importance).

This article was nominated for deletion on 10 June 2011 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

Unsubstantiated severe claim in criticism section since at least 2015

- reference links cited are no longer valid and can't support claims of the editors from 2018 - Bias/prejudice editors on Wiki overseeing Ghostery section = Simple updates such as current extension information are reversed by "others" to shape a negative opinion about this extension - Denial of Edward Snowden's shout out to this extension - Entire criticism section needs to be deleted as it no longer has any valid references but bias senior editors allowed it to remain. - Misleading and erroneous opinions are contained in the criticism section - False accusations never proven remain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Newb787 (talk • contribs) 06:56, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This was brought up already in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ghostery/Archives/2015#Criticism_Section and still applies.

In the Criticism section, one sentence reads: "GhostRank [...] sent that information back to advertisers so they could better formulate their ads to avoid being blocked.[20]" (Emphasis mine.)

The first part is as far as I know uncontested, the second has been contradicted by the makers many, many times, is not further qualified, explained or supported in any way in the referenced article and is basically unsubstantiated conjecture.

(I am not affiliated with the company or the extension and haven't used it in years because I don't need it and am uncomfortable with their affiliations, even if I personally don't think they're immoral.)

--2003:C9:4711:4B00:A0D9:D261:9830:FF1B (talk) 12:19, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:FALSEBALANCE. We don't delete unfavorable information just because the article subject doesn't like it. MrOllie (talk) 13:20, 8 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That does not address the statements at all and appears to not have even made an attempt to understand them. --2003:C9:4727:6B00:E2D5:5AC0:B816:E590 (talk) 13:39, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
-{{WikiProject Marketing & Advertising|class=Start|importance=Low}}
+{{WikiProject banner shell|class=Start|1=
-{{WikiProject Software|class=Start|importance=Low}}
+{{WikiProject Marketing & Advertising|importance=Low}}
+{{WikiProject Computing |importance=Low |free-software=y |free-software-importance=Mid |software=y |software-importance=Mid}}
+}}
 {{oldafdfull| date = 10 June 2011 (UTC) | result = '''keep''' | page = Ghostery }}
 {{User:ClueBot III/ArchiveThis|archiveprefix=Talk:Ghostery/Archives/|format=Y|age=26297|index=yes|archivebox=yes|box-advert=yes}}
+== Unsubstantiated severe claim in criticism section since at least 2015 ==
-== Ownership ==
+- reference links cited are no longer valid and can't support claims of the editors from 2018
+- Bias/prejudice editors on Wiki overseeing Ghostery section
+= Simple updates such as current extension information are reversed by "others" to shape a negative opinion about this extension
+- Denial of Edward Snowden's shout out to this extension
+- Entire criticism section needs to be deleted as it no longer has any valid references but bias senior editors allowed it to remain.
+- Misleading and erroneous opinions are contained in the criticism section
+- False accusations never proven remain.   <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Newb787|Newb787]] ([[User talk:Newb787#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Newb787|contribs]]) 06:56, 8 December 2022 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
+This was brought up already in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ghostery/Archives/2015#Criticism_Section and
-The product an brand Ghostery (c) is now owned by [https://www.ghostery.com/blog/ghostery-news/ghostery-acquired-cliqz/ Cliqz International GmbH], a German based company. Ghostery Inc. renamed to Evidon and focuses on B2B compliance services. The German company Cliqz focuses on privacy (anti-tracking) and does not sell user-data of any kind.  <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/37.120.14.158|37.120.14.158]] ([[User talk:37.120.14.158#top|talk]]) 02:01, 22 February 2017 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
+still applies.
+In the Criticism section, one sentence reads:
+"GhostRank [...] sent that information back to advertisers ''so they could better formulate their ads to avoid being blocked''.[20]" (Emphasis mine.)
+The first part is as far as I know uncontested, the second has been contradicted by the makers many, many times, is not further qualified, explained or supported in any way in the referenced article and is basically unsubstantiated conjecture.
-== Profitability ==
-What is their business model? how do they make money? 15:32, 2 March 2012 (UTC)  <small><span class="autosigned">— Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[User:Lingust|Lingust]] ([[User talk:Lingust|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Lingust|contribs]]) </span></small><!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
-:This question has been posted here for 3 years, and neither Fixanoid, nor  <small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/205.197.242.187|205.197.242.187]] ([[User talk:205.197.242.187|talk]]) 03:17, 18 May 2015 (UTC)</small><!-- Template:Unsigned IP --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
+(I am not affiliated with the company or the extension and haven't used it in years because I don't need it and am uncomfortable with their affiliations, even if I personally don't think they're immoral.)
-== Is Ghostery Just Another Marketing Ploy? ==
+--[[Special:Contributions/2003:C9:4711:4B00:A0D9:D261:9830:FF1B|2003:C9:4711:4B00:A0D9:D261:9830:FF1B]] ([[User talk:2003:C9:4711:4B00:A0D9:D261:9830:FF1B|talk]]) 12:19, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
-Just wondering. Since Ghostery is owned by something called Better Advertising is it possible that G actually is a marketing program in disguise and that conflict of interest is why so many are having an issue with its ability to get rid of all the cookies when there are other programs out there that don't seem to have this issue?
+:See [[WP:FALSEBALANCE]]. We don't delete unfavorable information just because the article subject doesn't like it. [[User:MrOllie|MrOllie]] ([[User talk:MrOllie|talk]]) 13:20, 8 December 2022 (UTC)
-http://download.cnet.com/1770-20_4-0.html?query=cookies&tag=srch&searchtype=downloads&filterName=platform%3DWindows&filter=platform%3DWindows
+::That does not address the statements at all and appears to not have even made an attempt to understand them. --[[Special:Contributions/2003:C9:4727:6B00:E2D5:5AC0:B816:E590|2003:C9:4727:6B00:E2D5:5AC0:B816:E590]] ([[User talk:2003:C9:4727:6B00:E2D5:5AC0:B816:E590|talk]]) 13:39, 24 May 2023 (UTC)
-Really, read their blog, people complain all the time that while some cookies are removed many, and often most, are allowed to remain. Just having checked mine, while one cookie was removed six remain. That's not what people download it for. Example:
-https://getsatisfaction.com/ghostery/topics/ghostery_simply_isnt_working?utm_medium=email&utm_source=reply_notification
-So I read:
-"It’s important to know that this kind of “3rd party tracking” is not necessarily a bad thing."
-"With Ghostery, Better Advertising can provide companies and industry associations with a complete view of OBA usage."
-http://blog.evidon.com/2010/01/19/better-advertising-acquires-ghostery/
-The above link also says that they don't use the info gotten from users to market, but I'm wondering what the true connection between Ghostery and marketers is and why they don't make that clear when hyping the product (after all, they do speak highly about "transparency"). Was the name change from Better Advertising to Evidon an attempt to hide a connection? Other clues are the strange questions when posting to the blog like "How does this make you feel?" which sounds almost like psychological profiling, and "Our employees are here to help". Employees? Understand, I'm not making an accusation but if people knew there was an undisclosed connection to marketers for purposes of tracking and/or advertising somehow I doubt they would be downloading it.
-Perhaps someone will say that the connection is harmless and the tracking allowed is necessary for sites to "provide services", yet not only is this allowance of tracking unnecessary but that position is also highly misleading as I believe that most people download it under the assumption that Ghostery eliminates all tracking and is solely concerned with privacy when in fact Ghostery may be more concerned with "better advertising".
-It's just the principle of the thing, though we are living in an increasingly Big Brotherish world privacy is still <i>a basic human right</i> not a privilege. Simply put people don't like to be tracked knowingly and especially unknowingly.
-By the way, I tried to post a pared down version of this question on their site but the "Choose a topic" drop down menu wouldn't work so I couldn't post. [[Special:Contributions/4.246.203.174|4.246.203.174]] ([[User talk:4.246.203.174|talk]]) 16:35, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
-:You're absolutely correct, it IS the principle of the thing.  I, also, was very hopeful that this software would help with transparency and limit tracking.  Instead, it seems that they want to choose WHO tracks you, to the benefit of the advertising partners of Ghostery, or whatever the current name of their parent company.  They haven't been acquired, it seems, but change their name and explain with doubletalk.  Their usage stats are not transparent, nor is their business model, and when I attempt to to disable/delete their software, they act very much like malware.  As the man said, "If it walks like a duck, and sounds like a duck, ..." [[Special:Contributions/205.197.242.187|205.197.242.187]] ([[User talk:205.197.242.187|talk]]) 03:48, 18 May 2015 (UTC)
-== Criticism Section ==
-The entire criticism section is all based on one article: http://www.technologyreview.com/news/516156/a-popular-ad-blocker-also-helps-the-ad-industry/ . This article was used as reference in the Criticism section. It was republished by mashable and that story was used as a reference in the Criticism section. The article was translated into German and hosted at heise.de/tr and that story was used as a reference in the Criticism section. The article was the sole source of a lifehacker post, and that post was used as a reference in the Criticism section. The German magazine Chip wrote an article apparently based on either the original Technology Review article or the translated version, this was used as a reference in the Criticism section.
-The most damning claim against Ghostery came in the lifehacker blog post that claims "[Ghostrank] sends that information back to advertisers so they can better formulate their ads to avoid being blocked". This claim is not expressed anywhere else, and is not supported by the source article.
-Every source except for the original technology review article should be removed from this section, and the unsupported claims should be removed.
-[[User:Onlynone|Onlynone]] ([[User talk:Onlynone|talk]]) 14:33, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
-As the Ghostshare is an opt in were the web user actively has to reveil this information is hardly a risk compared to the unsolicited beakons and trackers. Those are not "opt-in" but come as a wanted or unwanted collateral.
-[[User:Theking2|Theking2]] ([[User talk:Theking2|talk]]) 14:05, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
-== External links modified ==
-Hello fellow Wikipedians,
-I have just modified one external link on [[Ghostery]]. Please take a moment to review [https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?diff=prev&oldid=759485475 my edit]. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit [[User:Cyberpower678/FaQs#InternetArchiveBot|this simple FaQ]] for additional information. I made the following changes:
-*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20151222173039/https://www.ghostery.com/support/faq/ghostery-add-on/exactly-what-data-does-ghostery-collect/ to https://www.ghostery.com/support/faq/ghostery-add-on/exactly-what-data-does-ghostery-collect/
-When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
-{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}
-Cheers.—[[User:InternetArchiveBot|'''<span style="color:darkgrey;font-family:monospace">InternetArchiveBot</span>''']] <span style="color:green;font-family:Rockwell">([[User talk:InternetArchiveBot|Report bug]])</span> 13:08, 11 January 2017 (UTC)