In the meantime, the effect of the push of users to an account or subscription as a way to continue to offer targeted advertisements is visible: With a 'no', a visitor will not see any content at all, so no advertisements either. With 'no consent' nothing has been set up, 20% of the visitors do not see any advertisements. The group 'no consent' now leads directly to a loss of income. What if that percentage continues to increase due to clear communication about targeting that the publisher has to give to website visitors in the request (mandatory according to the DSA)? The solution is at hand Publishers already have the solution in their hands: content and quality . That's why visitors come and advertisers pay.
Be transparent and ensure your privacy. This way you are preparing for a future without cookies but with a sustainable advertising model. Smart targeting is also possible without consent. Don't look at data such as age, income, location, gender and what fax number list someone was interested in last week. Aim for variables that have nothing to do with a person. What is someone reading right now and in what context? On which domain? And on what kind of device? On what day and at what time? Also read: Content without consent: who needs cookies? Ster advertising successfully tested this at the NPO. This works so well that NPO has now completely got rid of cookies .
And also take a look at the NOS site: no consent question to be seen. Omroep Gelderland takes a different approach and gives a clear option to refuse everything. Now you often hear that an NPO or NOS can more easily realize a consent request because they are major players, advertisers cannot ignore it. But we are convinced that you do not need a very strong national domain to be able to handle the consent question.