Explorez tous les épisodes du podcast The Monopoly Report

Alan Chapell speaks with Dr. Johnny Ryan, Director of ENFORCE at the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, about GDPR enforcement, real-time bidding, purpose limitation, publisher economics, and the growing power of major technology platforms. Johnny is a long-time critic of programmatic advertising - having characterized real-time bidding as “The biggest data breach in history.” Chapell and Ryan explore whether privacy-friendly advertising can support publishers, the costs of fraud and ad tech intermediaries, and what Europe’s regulatory approach means for the future of digital advertising. The Chapell Regulatory Insider can be found at: https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Takeaways: Weak enforcement has limited GDPR’s practical impact on the digital advertising industry. Purpose limitation and data minimization could reduce privacy risks while still supporting advertising. Reducing behavioral tracking may help publishers limit fraud and unnecessary ad tech costs. Greater transparency is needed around digital advertising measurement and platform data practices. Europe’s digital sovereignty depends partly on stronger enforcement, competition policy, and alternatives to dominant technology platforms. Chapters:00:00 Introduction: GDPR, Privacy and Ad Tech03:10 Dr. Johnny Ryan’s Journey Into Privacy and Ad Tech06:03 GDPR and Europe’s Enforcement Problem11:42 Consent and the European Privacy Framework13:42 Can Advertising Work With Less Personal Data?17:30 Publisher Economics and Contextual Advertising21:09 The Challenge of ID-Less Advertising23:31 Advertisers, Measurement and Ad Tech Transparency27:11 Purpose Limitation and Platform Power36:35 Data Ownership, Privacy and Competition40:07 Europe’s Digital Sovereignty and Big Tech46:04 What Should Ad Tech Companies Do Next?48:30 Tracking, Fraud and Publisher Revenue53:33 Lessons From Dr. Ryan’s Career55:07 Alan’s Key Takeaways and Closing Analysis Guests: Alan Chapell Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Claire Stapleton joins Alan Chapell to discuss her years inside Google, from shaping the company’s internal communications to helping organize the 2018 Google walkout. They explore the following from multiple perspectives: Google’s “Don’t Be Evil” philosophy, employee activism, corporate messaging, the limits of worker dissent, and what Claire calls “PR jujitsu” and what Alan characterizes as “Regulatory jujitsu.” Alan and Claire compare notes as between Google’s approach to addressing internal consent, to the company’s approach to managing dissent within the broader digital media industry and within standards bodies. Drawing heavily from Claire’s book Don't Be Evil: Bad Bosses, Fake Promises, and My Escape from Big Tech.the conversation also examines how money, power, and institutional influence can reshape corporate values, plus why employees should build an identity and sense of purpose beyond their jobs. Don’t Be Evil by Claire Stapleton can be purchased at https://tinyurl.com/5n7kkhv3.Yield by Ari Paparo can be purchased at https://tinyurl.com/msfdwrry. The Chapell Regulatory Insider can be found at: https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Takeaways: Google’s early culture built a powerful internal story around openness, innovation, and doing good. The 2018 Google walkout exposed the limits of employee voice and internal dissent. “PR jujitsu” can acknowledge criticism without committing to meaningful change. Vague principles like “Don’t Be Evil” leave significant room for companies to define their own standards. Power and wealth can insulate executives from ordinary feedback and criticism. Employees should avoid making their corporate identity their entire source of self-worth and purpose. Chapters:00:29 Welcome and Introduction00:53 Meet Claire Stapleton01:11 The 2018 Google Walkout04:49 Claire’s Early Years at Google08:09 When Google’s Story Started to Crack10:08 The Road to Employee Activism16:06 Google’s Strategy, Power and Privacy18:19 Article 13 and the Limits of Employee Voice25:32 What “Don’t Be Evil” Really Meant30:03 When Google’s Culture Began to Change32:38 Google’s “PR Jujitsu” Playbook35:18 Alan’s Experience With Google’s Influence40:33 Money, Power and Executive Insulation44:48 Claire’s Advice to Her Younger Self50:22 Alan’s Key Takeaways55:01 Closing Guests: Alan Chapell Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Marc Guldimann, founder and CEO of Adelaide, joins Alan Chapell to discuss why attribution may be solving the wrong problem, how AU measures media quality, and whether attention can become a true currency for digital advertising. The Chapell Regulatory Insider can be found at: https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Takeaways Attribution may be a symptom of poor media-quality signals. AU measures the probability of attention and outcomes. Adelaide wants AU to become a shared media-quality currency. Publisher audits could reduce reliance on impression-level tracking. AI-driven media buying will need reliable quality signals. Shared quality standards could reshape how digital media is bought and priced. Chapters00:00 Marc Guldimann’s Background05:45 Why Viewability Gets Gamed07:54 The Problem With Attention Duration10:50 Can AU Replace Viewability?15:06 How Adelaide Builds AU20:13 Adelaide’s Publisher Strategy23:35 AI Agents & Media Quality27:37 Browsers, Privacy & Tracking31:55 Are Outcomes the Real Currency?34:41 Private vs. Shared Measurement38:16 Closing Guests: Alan Chapell Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Thirteen months of Google's search data is worth roughly seventeen years of Bing's. That single number explains why Google's search business is now under pressure from four directions at once—the DOJ's antitrust remedy, the EU's Digital Markets Act, the UK's CMA, and the proposed US SEARCH Act. Now that Google is required to share its search data with competitors, the question turns to whether such sharing can be done in a way that is privacy safe. Do PETs offer a solution? Is this simply a place where privacy interests and competition interests are perpetually at odds? Is this simply another opportunity for Google to delay? Alan Chapell sits down with Alissa Cooper of the KGI to discuss the DOJ search remedies, the EU Digital Markets Act, privacy, AI, and what search data sharing could mean for competition and innovation Alissa Cooper’s bio can be found at: https://kgi.georgetown.edu/people/alissa-cooper/  The Chapell Regulatory Insider can be found at: https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Takeaways Why regulators want Google to share search data Privacy vs. competition in search How AI is changing the data-sharing debate Why independent oversight is essential Chapters 00:00 Introduction 03:24 Why Google Must Share Search Data 08:35 Comparing Global Regulations 16:06 What Search Data Includes 19:34 Privacy Concerns 32:20 Independent Oversight 43:00 Final Takeaways 50:05 Closing Remarks Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Is self-regulation still relevant in today's privacy-first advertising landscape? Alan Chapell sits down with Andy Dale, General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer at OpenAP, to discuss the future of industry self-regulation, AI governance, privacy laws, and what ad tech organizations must do to remain valuable as regulation evolves. The Chapell Regulatory Insider may be found at https://chapellreport.substack.com/ The Data Protection Breakfast Club podcast may be found at https://rephonic.com/podcasts/data-protection-breakfast-club Takeaways: - Why self-regulation in ad tech needs to evolve beyond traditional compliance. - How AI governance, privacy laws, and managed services are reshaping the industry. - The future role of trade associations in supporting advertisers and ad tech companies. - Why collaboration and practical guidance may matter more than ever. Chapters: 00:00 Introduction 00:34 Meet Andy Dale, General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer at OpenAP 02:54 Is self-regulation still relevant? 06:08 Why now is the time to rethink industry organizations 07:36 Privacy laws vs. self-regulation 10:18 What advertisers need today 13:12 The future of industry collaboration 19:17 The three pillars: Advocacy, Standards & Compliance 22:11 How best practices should evolve 28:50 Managed services and privacy support 32:04 AI governance and the next opportunity 33:18 Does the DAA still matter? 37:25 Industry partnerships and consolidation 44:20 The future value of trade associations 46:03 Final thoughts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Alan Chapell speaks with Martin Thomson, Distinguished Engineer at Mozilla, about the W3C Attribution API, browser-based measurement, privacy-enhancing technologies, interoperability, fraud, and the future of advertising attribution. They examine the tradeoffs between privacy, competition, and ad measurement. The Attribution API spec may be found here: https://github.com/w3c/attributionThe Chapell Regulatory Insider may be found here: https://chapellreport.substack.com/A Written Q&A between Alan and Martin may be found here: https://monopoly-report.com/p/the-w3c-attribution-api Takeaways Mozilla explains the goals behind the W3C Attribution API and browser-based measurement. The discussion explores privacy, interoperability, and the future of digital advertising. Martin Thomson addresses concerns around attribution accuracy, fraud, and competition. The episode examines what remains after Google's Privacy Sandbox initiative. Alan Chapell and Martin Thomson debate how future web standards could reshape ad measurement. Chapters00:00 Introduction01:26 Meet Martin Thomson of Mozilla06:04 What is the W3C Attribution API?10:57 Transparency and trust in browser measurement14:32 Privacy Sandbox and what remains16:07 Differential privacy explained18:37 Interoperability vs. user privacy23:27 Attribution, incrementality, and measurement challenges27:35 The future of measurement partners31:56 Fraud, attribution, and Google's role37:20 Designing standards for the future web41:20 Alan Chapell's key takeaways and analysis45:54 Closing remarks Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Alan Chapell sits down with Cindy Cohn, former Executive Director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and author of Privacy’s Defender. They discuss the landmark Bernstein encryption case, the Snowden revelations, surveillance, behavioral advertising, privacy regulation, competition law, some lessons for companies in the ads space, and the future of digital rights in an increasingly monitored world.  Privacy’s Defender is available at: https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262051248/privacys-defender/ Can Privacy Technologies Replace Cookies? Ad Revenue in a Field Experiment is available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5284526  The Chapell Regulatory Insider is available at: https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Takeaways Cindy Cohn reflects on her role in the landmark Bernstein case that helped establish encryption as protected speech. The conversation explores how the Snowden disclosures exposed mass government surveillance and reshaped privacy debates. Privacy, competition, copyright, and technology policy are deeply interconnected and require a multi-pronged approach. Both guests agree that many privacy regulations unintentionally burden smaller companies while reinforcing Big Tech dominance. Behavioral advertising, surveillance pricing, and data-driven discrimination pose growing risks to consumers. Cohn argues that privacy rights must be continuously defended and that the next generation has a critical role to play. Chapters 00:00 Introduction to Cindy Cohn and Privacy’s Defender 03:57 The Bernstein Case and the Fight for Encryption Rights 06:10 Human Rights Law as a Foundation for Privacy Advocacy 08:23 How an Early Court Victory Shaped a Career 13:22 The NSA, AT&T, and the Snowden Revelations 20:46 Centralized Power, Internet Architecture, and Digital Freedom 25:07 Privacy Regulation, the FCC, and the FTC Debate 29:19 Private Rights of Action and Privacy Enforcement 31:54 Behavioral Advertising vs. Contextual Advertising 35:20 Surveillance Pricing and Consumer Fairness 39:33 Competition Law, Big Tech, and Regulatory Capture 41:10 Why Privacy Is a Team Sport 45:02 Music, Community, and Avoiding Burnout 48:26 Key Lessons from the Conversation 53:08 Surveillance Pricing, AI, and Future Risks 54:06 The Growing Number of Privacy Choke Points 55:11 Final Thoughts and Book Recommendation Guests: Alan Chapell Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

At the NAI Summit 2026, Tony Ficarrotta, VP and General Counsel of the NAI, sat down with Tom Kemp, Executive Director of CalPrivacy, for an in-depth discussion on the California Delete Act, the DROP platform, data broker regulation, opt-out preference signals, privacy enforcement, and the future of federal privacy legislation. They explore how California is making privacy rights easier to exercise for consumers, the challenges of balancing innovation with consumer protection, and what businesses should expect from the next wave of privacy regulation. More info on the NAI at https://thenai.org/ More info on CalPrivacy at https://privacy.ca.gov/about-us/ More info on the Chapell Regulatory Insider at https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Takeaways Former Silicon Valley entrepreneur and cybersecurity founder Tom Kemp now leads CalPrivacy as Executive Director. CalPrivacy aims to make privacy rights easier to exercise for consumers through tools like DROP and browser-based opt-out signals. California is developing a centralized system for consumers to request data deletion from registered brokers. The agency handles enforcement, rulemaking, audits, education, advocacy, and the data broker registry. Kemp opposes federal laws that could override stronger state privacy protections. California is expanding browser-based privacy controls while prioritizing consumer intent. Key focuses include audits, consumer education, streamlined compliance, and alignment with other state privacy laws. Chapters00:00 Introduction & Special NAI Summit Interview01:38 Meet Tom Kemp: From Entrepreneur to CalPrivacy Director08:49 Why Tom Kemp Wrote His Book on Big Tech & Privacy14:01 Why Privacy Matters and the Risks of Personal Data Misuse18:32 What Makes CalPrivacy Different From Other Regulators?24:30 California Privacy Legislation and Current Policy Priorities29:22 AB 1542 and the Debate Over Sensitive Data Sales36:38 Expanding the Delete Act Beyond California40:28 Federal Privacy Law and the Secure Data Act Debate46:39 Opt-Out Preference Signals and Consumer Choice at Scale57:03 Privacy Regulation, Competition, and Browser Influence01:02:08 The Future of California Privacy Regulation01:04:23 Building CalPrivacy’s Next Chapter01:07:54 Closing Remarks & Preview of Next Episode Guests: Alan Chapell Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Alan Chapell sits down with journalist, entrepreneur, and Wired co-founder John Battelle for a deep discussion on AI, privacy, data ownership, publishing, and the future of the internet. They unpack the “inner monologue bloom,” OpenAI’s ambitious ad revenue projections, the economics behind content creation in the AI age, and why Battelle believes data portability could unlock an entirely new innovation economy. From programmatic advertising to platform control, this conversation explores who will ultimately control the next era of digital infrastructure. You may find John at https://battellemedia.com/ or https://www.linkedin.com/in/johnbattelle/. You may find the Chapell Regulatory Insider at https://chapellreport.substack.com/. Takeaways - AI chatbots are creating a new “inner monologue” data economy. - Data is non-rivalrous, but tech platforms treat it like a closed asset. - OpenAI’s $100B ad revenue target would require massive market disruption. - Publishers still lack a scalable AI monetization model. -Programmatic ad tech may be one of the most underutilized infrastructures online. - Battelle argues consumers should own portable, machine-readable versions of their data. - AI agents could reshape commerce, search and personalization. - Platform control battles are shifting from browsers to AI ecosystems. - Local journalism faces a growing sustainability crisis in the AI era. - The next phase of the internet may depend on user-controlled AI agents. Chapters 00:00 Alan introduces John Battelle and his background in tech and media. 03:00 The “inner monologue bloom” and AI-driven privacy concerns. 09:20 Why data is treated incorrectly as a rivalrous asset. 15:00 OpenAI’s $100B advertising ambition and whether it’s realistic. 19:30 The future of AI agents and user-controlled personal data. 27:15 Apple, platform gatekeeping and the fight for user agency. 35:00 The economics of AI infrastructure and compute costs. 39:55 How AI impacts publishers, local journalism and content monetization. 50:55 Retail media, first-party data and the future of advertising. 58:00 Journalism as a public good and the risks of centralized AI control. 01:01:00 Why programmatic ad tech remains massively underestimated. 01:11:30 Battelle’s proposed “Token Act” and machine-readable data portability. 01:16:45 Final thoughts and where to follow John Battelle. Guests: Alan Chapell Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

JP Schmetz, Chief of Search and Ads at Brave, joins Alan Chapell to debate the questions that most browser executives won't touch on the record. Should publishers stop outsourcing ad sales to Meta and Google? Is "first-party vs. third-party" a meaningful distinction to users — or a convenient line Brave draws to justify default blocking? Alan pushes back. JP pushes back harder. Featuring references to Jason Kint at DCN, GPC defaults, The Knight-Georgetown Institute (KGI) report covering data sharing pursuant to the DOJ Search remedies (among other items), and why rooting against the AI investment cycle is, by default, rooting for Google to win everything again. The KGI Report on data sharing is available at https://kgi.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Designing_the_Technical_Committee_Report_KGI-FINAL-April-2026.pdf. Sumit Sharma’s Report on Data Sharing is available at https://insights.sumitsharma.consulting/p/google-search-remedies-implementation The Chapell Regulatory Insider is available at https://chapellreport.substack.com/  Takeaways - Brave believes browsers should prioritize users over advertisers. - JP argues Google’s monopoly power comes from distribution and monetization. - Brave blocks third-party requests by default for privacy reasons. - Alan and JP debate the merits of blocking ads in the name of privacy. - Brave Search now powers parts of the AI search ecosystem. - AI could redistribute traffic away from traditional search engines. - JP believes publishers became too dependent on programmatic ad tech. - Subscription-based AI models may create a healthier internet economy. Chapters 00:00 Introduction and meeting JP Schmetz 00:36 Can browsers still serve users first? 04:05 Why browsers need search revenue to survive 05:49 The economics of search advertising 08:10 DOJ remedies, Chrome, and Google dominance 10:39 Brave’s evolution from privacy browser to search business 12:47 Why Brave blocks third-party ads and trackers 16:18 Publishers, ad tech, and selling ads directly 19:18 Ad tech circumvention and browser controls 22:02 Is Brave hurting publisher monetization? 25:05 Contextual advertising vs third-party tracking 28:47 Global Privacy Control and browser defaults 32:36 Brave Search, Google defaults, and monetization 34:56 Google data sharing and search competition 41:15 AI, search, and the future of the internet 46:30 Subscription models vs ad-funded AI 49:43 Why competition against Google still matters 51:25 Final thoughts and closing remarks Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Don Marti joins Alan Chapell to unpack the hidden risks behind the push for industry standards for “privacy-safe”  ad attribution, the myth of privacy-preserving tech, and how big platforms may be reshaping the future of digital advertising. The Chapell Regulatory Insider is at https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Don Marti may be found at: https://aloodo.com/  See Don Marti’s recent AdExchanger piece at https://www.adexchanger.com/data-driven-thinking/what-happens-when-the-attribution-cartel-meets-advertisings-halo-effect/   Additional discussion re: the problems with PETs for advertising https://privacy-daily.com/news/2025/06/10/PrivacyEnhancing-Technologies-Are-Not-a-Silver-Bullet-PEPR-Told-2506100010 https://rjionline.org/news/the-traffic-and-revenue-crisis-for-news-is-a-symptom-of-big-techs-economy-wide-trust-collapse/  https://rjionline.org/news/big-tech-is-squeezing-advertising-jobs-and-companies/  https://rjionline.org/news/big-techs-economic-takeover-can-be-beat/  https://rjionline.org/news/big-tech-runs-counter-to-journalism-values-so-why-is-the-news-industry-helping-tech-take-over/  Takeaways Privacy-focused users are often the most valuable customers, challenging traditional ad tech assumptions about measurability. Attribution is fundamentally about linking ad exposure to outcomes, but current models often prioritize simplicity over accuracy. “Privacy-preserving” systems frequently focus on mathematical guarantees that don’t align with real-world privacy harms like discrimination or deception. Proposed attribution standards may unintentionally increase surveillance incentives by enabling fraud and data laundering. Fraud in attribution systems can reward actors who intercept users right before purchase, distorting true performance signals. Big tech companies may benefit from attribution systems that reinforce their own ad recommendations, reducing competition. The “halo effect” shows ads perform better in trusted, premium environments, but current systems undervalue this dynamic. A shift toward cheap, commoditized ad placements weakens both brand equity and publisher sustainability. The so-called “attribution cartel” is defined by systems that avoid user consent and bypass opt-out mechanisms. Effective privacy regulation should focus on real-world harms rather than technical implementation details. Chapters 00:00 Intro & What Don Marti Has Been Working On 01:18 The “Marti Paradox” 02:52 What Attribution Really Means 03:35 The Broken State of Attribution Today 07:32 Complexity, Perception & Industry Behavior 08:21 The Problem with “Privacy-Preserving” Tech 11:54 Big Tech Incentives & Centralization 16:17 The Halo Effect & Ad Effectiveness 17:01 Commodification vs Sustainable Advertising 21:28 Attribution Fraud Explained 23:49 Data Laundering Through Attribution Systems 26:09 The “Attribution Cartel” Defined 29:17 W3C, Standards & Industry Power Dynamics 32:29 Alternative Approaches (AdMap) 37:03 What Good Privacy Regulation Looks Like 40:56 The Future of Attribution 43:20 What Industry Stakeholders Can Do 45:00 Rethinking Privacy Harms Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Andrew Woods, GC of SSP Pubmatic, joins Alan Chapell to discuss Pubmatic’s approach to agentic ads — and how AI has irrevocably changed the legal profession. Pubmatic’s recent agentic test campaign results were a hit at Marketecture Live, and Andrew goes deep into what he believes will need to happen in order for agentic to live up to its promise. The Chapell Regulatory Insider is available at https://chapellreport.substack.com/.  Takeaways Agentic AI does not create new liability; it accelerates existing frameworks Accountability sits with whoever deploys the agent Logging and decision provenance will be critical for compliance Privacy compliance is less about difficulty, more about fragmentation Hope is not a plan when it comes to regulatory scrutiny Data minimization is becoming a real engineering constraint AI will eliminate routine legal work but elevate strategic problem-solving Agentic systems can become powerful compliance tools if built correctly Chapters 00:10 Introduction to the episode and Andrew Woods 02:01 Andrew’s background and journey into ad tech 04:20 Lessons from Twitter on privacy and user safety 06:29 What a General Counsel does in modern ad tech 08:43 Biggest lesson from global privacy enforcement 11:04 Building trust between legal and business teams 13:21 Who is liable in agentic AI advertising 16:29 Why logging and data provenance matter 18:27 The role of compliance signals and guardrails 20:57 Why agentic compliance frameworks are not built yet 22:57 Regulation versus fragmentation challenges 24:55 How PubMatic approaches privacy by design 27:10 Data minimization in practice 28:16 Non-negotiables for agentic compliance frameworks 31:57 Where industry discussions are happening 33:50 The future of agentic AI in advertising 36:42 How PubMatic’s legal team uses AI today 40:26 Why traditional legal work is disappearing 45:09 Final thoughts and closing Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Monopoly Report’s Alan Chapell sits down with FTC Commissioner Mark Meador at Marketecture Live to discuss industry privacy self-regulation, the future of the cookie opt-outs, the use of privacy as an anticompetitive pretext, and some ideas for better protecting kids online. Takeaways Self-regulation still matters, but must be effective and avoid collusion risks. Privacy and competition often exist in tension and require balance. Cookie-based systems are imperfect and depend on better alternatives emerging. Risks around using privacy as a pretext to lock up the browser market or access to critical data. Transparency is key for both consumer protection and fair competition. Age verification is advancing rapidly with privacy-conscious innovation. “Free” platforms still involve economic transactions and consumer trade-offs. Antitrust enforcement is shifting toward tackling dominant players’ conduct. Chapters 00:00 Introduction and role of self-regulation in advertising 00:41 Why self-regulation still matters and how it should work 02:27 What makes self-reg effective in the eyes of the FTC 04:12 The limitations of cookie-based privacy tools 06:03 Global privacy controls and market-driven solutions 08:38 Balancing privacy and competition in digital markets 10:33 Protecting children online and age verification innovation 14:29 Solving privacy concerns in age verification systems 15:38 Why universal identity checks are not the goal 18:06 Measuring harm in “free” digital platforms 20:25 Current state of antitrust enforcement 23:07 Addressing monopolies after consolidation has occurred 25:28 Rethinking antitrust and the risks of concentrated power Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Host Alan Chapell is joined by Ajit Varma and Kush Amlani from Mozilla, where they talk about the intersection of privacy and competition, the weaponization of privacy, and how Mozilla is placing a bet that staying true to their core privacy principles will enable Firefox to succeed over the long term.  The Chapell Regulatory Insider may be found at - https://chapellreport.substack.com/   Kush Amlani is Director, Global Competition & Regulation at Mozilla, leading the work to create a level playing field in digital markets internationally. Prior to joining Mozilla, Kush was a Senior Competition & Regulatory Lawyer at the BBC for five years, based in London. He joined the BBC from SJ Berwin LLP (later Kings & Wood Mallesons), where he worked on antitrust cases across the UK and EU, spanning sectors such as energy, media, telecoms, and pharmaceuticals. In his role as Head of Firefox, Ajit Varma leads the development of the Firefox strategy, ensuring it’s a delightful experience for current users, as well as those of the future. Ajit has years of product management experience from Square, Google, and, immediately prior to joining Mozilla, Meta, where he was responsible for monetization of WhatsApp and overseeing Meta’s business messaging platform. Earlier in his career, he was a co-founder and CEO of Adku, a venture-funded machine learning platform that was acquired by Groupon. Ajit has a BS from the University of Texas at Austin. He is based in the Bay Area. Takeaways Product and policy are now deeply intertwined in modern tech decisions Some browsers are increasingly evolving into AI-powered agents Mozilla prioritizes user choice, transparency, and choice-driven AI experiences Privacy and competition should work together, not against each other Open source and browser diversity are critical hedges against Big Tech dominance Mozilla intentionally sacrifices revenue to stay aligned with its core privacy and trust principles The future of AI depends on interoperability and low barriers to entry Chapters 00:00 Intro to Mozilla’s role in privacy and competition 00:41 Why product and policy are now inseparable 03:03 Kush’s path into law and regulation 04:49 How browsers evolved into user agents 08:26 New AI browsers and distribution strategies 09:40 Mozilla’s approach to monetization without selling data 12:14 Why privacy matters more than ever 15:15 Privacy vs competition in regulation 24:08 Mozilla’s AI strategy and avoiding dependency 27:42 What trustworthy AI actually means 31:36 Privacy-enhancing technologies and their limits 34:11 The trade-offs of privacy-first business models 40:23 Why competition and browser diversity matter 41:32 The importance of Mozilla’s Gecko engine Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Host Alan Chapell is joined by Mark Naples of WIT Strategy, where they discuss the history of self-reg in the ads space, the NAI's origins in 2000, the DAA's launch a decade later, and the rise of the cookie opt-out mechanism. They also get into AI and whether that will change the path of innovation in adtech. Find Mark Naples here https://www.witstrategy.com/mark-naples. The Chapell Regulatory Insider may be found here - https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Takeaways The DAA’s core goal was to delay, if not prevent, government regulation—and it worked Transparency was helpful, but didn’t meaningfully protect users Over the years, the focus was on regulating smaller players while Big Tech scaled unchecked Cookie-based opt-outs were flawed but persisted because they “worked” (kind of, sort of) AI is degrading critical thinking and originality in communications Innovation in ad tech has slowed significantly - will the rush to agentic speed it back up? Engagement matters more than clicks, but most marketers still don’t get it Chapters 00:00 Intro & Welcome to the Monopoly Report 02:20 Setting the Stage: Privacy, Regulation & Ad Tech 03:30 The NAI Origins & Early Industry Tensions 08:30 DoubleClick vs. Open AdStream Models 12:00 Privacy vs. Transparency: What Actually Mattered 16:30 The Birth of the DAA & Self-Regulation 22:00 Was the DAA Really a Success? 27:00 Big Tech’s Rise & Missed Warning Signs 32:00 Cookie Opt-Outs & Technical Reality 36:30 Power, Regulation & the Role of Government 41:00 AI’s Impact on PR & Media Quality 45:00 The Decline of Innovation in Ad Tech 49:00 What the Industry Should Be Talking About: Engagement 52:00 Where to Find Mark & Closing Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Allison Schiff, Managing Editor at AdExchanger and host Alan Chapell, break down the growing tension between business incentives and ethical responsibility in the ad tech industry. The background context is the recent RFI from the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.   Who within the larger ad space is willing to admit - WE are part of the problem.  Check out the Chapell Regulatory Insider at https://chapellreport.substack.com/.  Takeaway In the ad space, Incentives sometimes drive behavior more than ethics. Regulation has adjusted core practices, but hasn’t changed the mindset. Data use has a real human impact. Data flows continue to lack transparency. Reform will require multiple forces. Chapter 00:00 Introduction & Guest Background 04:09 ICE RFI & Industry Silence 08:06 Ethics & Industry Responsibility 13:34 Public Positions & Industry Response 18:13 Surveillance Advertising & Data Use 23:42 Regulation & State Laws 29:09 Privacy Challenges & Vulnerable Populations 36:48 Data Practices & Transparency 43:18 Drivers of Privacy Reform 48:06 Industry & Regulatory Challenges Ahead 52:14 Closing Thoughts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Tony Katsur, CEO of IAB Tech Lab, joins Alan Chapell to unpack the rise of agentic AI and its impact on privacy and data governance. They explore why current approaches fall short and how the industry risks repeating past mistakes. The discussion breaks down vector embeddings and how they enable data matching without exposing raw user information. They also examine ongoing challenges around compliance, consent, and data deletion in AI-driven systems. Finally, the episode covers AI content marketplaces and how frameworks like COMP aim to bring structure, transparency, and fair compensation to publishers. The Chapell Regulatory Insider may be found here: https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Takeaways Agentic AI brings powerful automation but risks repeating past privacy failures without strong governance frameworks in place. Existing privacy standards like TCF and GPP can be embedded into agentic systems but need further evolution and enforcement. Vector embeddings enable privacy-conscious data matching by comparing similarity rather than sharing raw data. Data deletion and compliance remain unresolved challenges when user data is embedded into AI models or vectors. Audit, attestation, and accountability mechanisms are critical to prevent misuse and misrepresentation in agentic ecosystems. AI content marketplaces require structured licensing frameworks like COMP to support fair compensation and transparency. Tokenization of content could improve tracking, attribution, and source-of-truth verification for publishers and brands. The industry is still early in agentic development and must slow down to build privacy-first foundations. Chapters 00:00 Intro and discussion on agentic AI hype vs reality 01:12 Why privacy is missing from the agentic AI conversation 03:34 Challenges with DSARs and scaling privacy compliance 05:08 Existing privacy frameworks and how they apply to agentic systems 07:44 The role of privacy taxonomy and data classification 12:38 Explaining vector embeddings and privacy-safe data matching 18:30 Compliance challenges with embeddings and data transparency 24:26 Agent registry and identity verification in agentic systems 30:54 AI content marketplaces and the COMP framework 35:24 COMP vs RSL and licensing models 38:15 Content tracking, tokenization, and transparency challenges 42:48 The future of AI content marketplaces 44:38 Why industry participation in Tech Lab is critical Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Sheila Colclasure joins host Alan Chapell to discuss some key lessons learned in a career that included significant privacy, AI and data governance roles at Acxiom and IPG. Sheila shares what inspired her to coin the term “March Fairness” as well as a few secrets on how to influence senior decision-makers on privacy and data governance issues. You can find the Chapell Regulatory Insider at https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Takeaways Sheila's journey into privacy began in 1997 at Axiom. Building a culture of privacy is essential for success. Documentation is crucial for privacy and AI governance. Words matter in privacy and AI governance discussions.. Data brokers play a vital role in the information services industry. Regulatory scrutiny on data brokers has evolved over the years. March Fairness highlights the importance of fairness in data usage. AI presents new challenges and opportunities for privacy. Understanding corporate strategy is key for privacy professionals. Sensitive data should generally be avoided in advertising use cases. Chapters 00:00 Introduction to Sheila Colclasure and the evolution of privacy governance. 02:00 Sheila’s privacy origin story and early work building Acxiom’s governance program. 04:20 Lessons from auditing data sources and creating ethical data sourcing standards. 09:20 Why documentation and governance discipline matter in privacy programs. 11:00 Building a digital responsibility framework across dozens of agencies at IPG. 17:30 The evolving debate around data brokers and regulatory scrutiny. 26:00 The concept of “March Fairness” and applying fairness to data governance. 30:30 AI, governance challenges, and the coming impact of quantum computing. 41:30 Career advice for privacy professionals Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Ben Isaacson, Founder of InHouse Privacy and longtime privacy attorney, joins the podcast to break down how California’s CPPA is reshaping the data broker landscape. From the DELETE Act and the drop mechanism to the broad definition of “sale” and “direct relationship,” Ben explains why ad tech, retail media, clean rooms, and even auto and smart TV companies may be in scope. He also shares what enforcement could look like in 2026, why smaller brokers may not survive, and the biggest misconception that continues to put companies at risk. Takeaways Ben Isaacson's journey into the privacy space began in 1995. The CCPA and CPRA have significantly influenced privacy regulations in California. Data brokers are now defined more broadly under California law. Ad tech companies must navigate complex compliance issues regarding data sharing. Retail media networks face challenges in adhering to data broker rules. Authorized agents may struggle with compliance as regulations evolve. The DELETE Act could lead to increased enforcement actions against data brokers. Misconceptions about data selling persist among companies. The future of data broker regulations may see more states adopting similar laws. Privacy by design is essential for companies to build trust with consumers. Chapters 00:00 Ben Isaacson’s privacy origin story and early internet lobbying 09:06 How CPPA enforcement is reshaping CCPA and CPRA 12:53 What California’s data broker definition really means 14:37 Why ad tech, DSPs, DMPs, and clean rooms may be in scope 17:42 Retail media networks and off platform monetization risk 26:26 The DELETE Act drop mechanism and 2026 enforcement timeline 29:02 Authorized agents and the rise of deletion services 38:06 The future of the data broker industry 41:15 The biggest misconception companies still believe about selling data Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

AI ethicist and governance pro Shoshana Rosenberg joins Alan Chapell to discuss how to build a framework for addressing the legal and regulatory risks involving AI. Given all the new AI and profiling rules flowing down into the ads space in 2026, Shoshana is exactly the person the ads space should be listening to right now. Pre-order Shoshana’s book “Practical AI Governance” here - www.practicalaigovernance.com Check out the Chapell Regulatory Insider here - https://chapellreport.substack.com/  Takeaways AI governance is less about compliance checklists and more about strategic oversight that prevents unseen liability. Digital agency means giving individuals context and control over how systems influence them. Post hoc explainability is insufficient because inference-driven systems are fundamentally probabilistic. Privacy Enhancing Technologies (PETs) can undermine marketplace trust when platforms utilizing PETs aren’t transparent about how they work and don’t allow advertisers to audit them.  Government procurement standards may drive AI accountability faster than direct regulation. Building on foundational AI models requires documenting what you add and controlling what you can evidence. The PRISM framework pushes teams beyond compliance toward structured ethical practice. Too many in the ad space are ignoring data and AI governance to their detriment. Chapters 00:00 Introduction and defining AI governance  01:09 Why AI governance is about strategy, not compliance  02:41 Shoshana’s path from engineer and Navy JAG to AI governance  05:22 Digital agency as a human right  09:13 What explainability should look like in advertising  11:23 The complexity of the ad tech ecosystem  13:25 Gaps in global AI regulation  17:06 Procurement and government contracting as enforcement levers  20:49 The tension between PETs and transparency  28:02 Agentic AI and worsening accountability gaps  29:30 Explainability by design by 2029  31:42 Practical guidance for little tech building with AI  35:11 The PRISM framework explained  38:43 Upcoming book and where to find Shoshana Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Alan Chapell is joined by Professor Jess Miers, visiting assistant professor of the University of Akron School of Law. Jess and Alan discuss some of the inherent challenges around protecting kids on the internet, and how those challenges are increasingly leading policymakers to age verification as the solution. While Alan is curious to see how this approach plays out in Australia, both Jess and Alan are skeptical that age verification will be good for kids or privacy in general.  Professor Miers’ Bio: https://www.uakron.edu/law/faculty/directory/profile.dot?u=jmiers  Chapell Regulatory Insider: https://chapellreport.substack.com/  Takeaways Jess Miers’ career transitioned from policy work to academia, finding a place to express her views freely. Parents face significant challenges in monitoring their children's online activities. The impact of social media on youth mental health is complex and multifaceted. More and more places worldwide are turning to age verification.  The U.S. legal landscape regarding age verification is evolving and is currently impeded due to First Amendment concerns. Advertisers must navigate a nebulous landscape regarding content directed at minors. Data privacy and security concerns are heightened with age verification requirements. Education of both parents and children is essential in addressing online safety. While these issues haven’t squarely hit the ad space just yet, Alan thinks that the post-COPPA 1.0 world will hit the ad space hard. Chapters: 00:01 Welcome + where Jess is calling from  00:36 Policy to academia + why it fits  02:07 Viral CA testimony moment  04:52 What problem age verification is trying to solve  07:03 Youth harm evidence and why causality is nuanced  10:27 Australia: under-16 ban and early consequences  13:54 Europe/UK: “age assurance,” feature limits, and gating  16:37 US: First Amendment and shifting legal strategies  22:55 Why age verification is risky: anonymity + data honeypots  44:28 Where to find Jess + wrap; transcript ends Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Alan Chapell is joined by Tom Kemp, the Executive Director of California's privacy regulator CalPrivacy, to discuss the launch of the DROP data deletion mechanism and California’s rules regarding the Global Privacy Control. While complimentary of California's efforts, Alan attempts to uplevel the discussion to talk more broadly about the larger public policy goals driving California's privacy regime. Tom Kemp's Bio: https://cppa.ca.gov/about_us/ Tom Kemp's Article: https://www.techpolicy.press/lets-make-privacy-easy/ Chapell Regulatory Insider: https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Takeaways CalPrivacy is the first independent agency focused on consumer privacy. The DROP system allows Californians to manage their privacy rights easily. Over 200,000 Californians signed up for the DROP system within a month of launch. Consumers are increasingly interested in privacy protections. The agency is addressing privacy harms, especially for vulnerable communities. Collaboration with other states is on the table a priority for CalPrivacy - particularly re: the DROP. Transparency in data practices is essential for consumer trust. The agency aims to balance innovation with privacy regulations. Authorized agents play a crucial role in helping consumers exercise their rights. Future regulations will focus on reducing friction for consumers.  Alan shares his thoughts on how CalPrivacy can better align its stated policy goals with outcomes Chapters 00:01 Intro and where Tom is calling from 01:04 What CalPrivacy is and Tom’s role 03:33 Why he took the job and his background 06:18 What’s still on the roadmap from “Let’s Make Privacy Easy” 08:18 What DROP is and how it works 11:05 Early adoption: 200,000+ signups 14:26 Privacy paradox and why “making it easy” matters 17:39 Other states showing interest in a DELETE Act model 20:41 Whether DROP could expand beyond California 23:04 Privacy harms and enforcement focus areas 31:14 Opt out preference signals (GPC/OOPS) and how they fit 37:11 Browser conflicts of interest and potential OOPS regs 41:23 Authorized agents and possible additional regulation 45:57 Defining “data broker” and who must register 54:57 Where to find CalPrivacy resources and closing Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week, Brendan Benedict joins Alan Chapell to talk about some of the recent civil antitrust complaints filed against Google by publishers including Penske, The Atlantic, McClatchy, Conde Nast, and Vox Media. With Judge Brinkema's remedies decision pending and a slew of other jurisdictions (e.g., EU, Canada) attempting to remedy Google's adtech practices, why are so many publishers and adtech companies jumping into the pool? Brendan Benedict may be found at: https://www.benedictlawgroup.com/brendan-benedict  The Chapell Regulatory Insider is available at: https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Takeaways The DOJ ruling gives private plaintiffs a head start on liability. These cases will mostly come down to damages calculations. Google avoided a jury, but the detailed opinion may make appeals harder. Remedies are likely behavioral, not divestiture. Statute of limitations could decide how far back damages go. Chapters 00:00 Intro & Guest Welcome 02:20 DOJ Remedies Decision Still Pending 06:20 Overview of Private Civil Lawsuits Against Google 07:05 Publisher Allegations 08:30 Damages Scale Discussion 10:05 DOJ Heavy Lifting for Private Plaintiffs 13:00 Case Consolidation & MDL Structure 15:25 Google Appeal Strategy 19:05 Duke Energy & “Monopoly Broth” Issue 21:45 Jury Trial Avoidance and Implications 23:45 Texas AG Case Expansion 26:00 Europe and Divestiture Pressure 29:05 Calculating Lost Revenue Damages 31:10 Statute of Limitations Debate 33:05 Settlement Likelihood & Bellwether Trials 39:20 FTC Meta Appeal Sidebar 48:10 Final Takeaways Summary 52:15 Closing & Upcoming Guest Preview Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

David LeDuc from the Network Advertising Initiative (NAI) sits down with host Alan Chapell to discuss the NAI's reinvention of its self-regulatory efforts in light of the influx of U.S. state privacy laws. They discuss what a good privacy law looks like, the challenges around finding the right balance, California's new Deletion tool, and the likelihood of a U.S. federal privacy law in the near term. More on David LeDuc and the NAI at https://thenai.org/about-the-nai-2/staff/ More on the Chapell Regulatory Insider at https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Takeaways The NAI has shifted from crafting self-regulatory rules to helping companies comply with complex state and federal privacy laws as enforcement accelerates. The California Delete Request and Opt-Out Platform (DROP) is likely the most impactful regulatory development for the ad space heading into 2026. Lumping third-party ad tech companies together with traditional data brokers may create regulatory confusion. Kids’ privacy is rapidly expanding beyond COPPA, creating major challenges for ad tech companies aound compliance given that most have no idea how to ascertain the age of a User. Enforcement sophistication and coordination among state attorneys general are increasing, changing the risk profile for companies that try to “keep their heads down” and do the minimum. Attempts to regulate AI indirectly through privacy and consumer protection laws are likely to continue as federal leadership stalls. Chapters 00:00 Welcome and episode overview 02:23 Who is David LeDuc and what is the NAI today 06:00 Are lobbyists really the problem 09:40 Kids’ data, age verification, and policy tensions 13:06 Educating regulators vs legislators 18:04 Ad tech vs data brokers 21:10 What does a “perfect” privacy law look like 30:27 California’s Delete Request and Opt-Out Platform 35:40 Global Privacy Control and browser obligations 39:25 AI regulation through privacy and consumer protection laws 44:20 Predictions for 2026 50:21 Where to find David and the NAI 52:10 – Final wrap-up Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Alan Chapell is joined by Dr. Travis Hall - Director for State Engagement at the Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT), a nonpartisan organization focused on civil rights and liberties in the digital age. They talk about the ads space through a lens balancing consumer expectations with business interests and debate the merits of the private right of action. Travis Hall’s bio is available at https://cdt.org/staff/travis-hall/  Chapell Regulatory Insider is available at https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Takeaways: CDT focuses on a broad range of digital rights, not just privacy. Data minimization is essential for effective privacy laws. Consumer expectations often differ from actual online behavior. State privacy laws need strong enforcement mechanisms. The private right of action can drive regulatory change. Targeted advertising is an area of continued focus. Understanding technology is crucial for effective policymaking. Advocacy must balance user rights with industry needs. Collaboration between stakeholders is vital for progress. Historical context shapes current privacy advocacy efforts. Chapter: 00:00 Introduction and Personal Insights 01:18 Understanding the Center for Democracy and Technology 04:33 The Role of CDT in State Privacy Legislation 10:20 Consumer Expectations and Privacy Law 16:11 Elements of Effective State Privacy Laws 21:26 Challenges in Data Minimization Enforcement 24:27 The Impact of GDPR on Ad Tech 26:22 Enforcement Challenges in Digital Media 30:22 The Role of Private Right of Action 38:52 Improving Targeted Advertising Practices 46:02 Acknowledging the Tension in Data Practices Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Professor Daphne Keller joins host Alan Chapell to discuss the implications of the EU Court of Justice decision in Russmedia - demonstrating that "breaking the Internet" is no longer solely the domain of pop stars like Taylor Swift. An expert in platform regulation and intermediary liability, Professor Keller explains how the CJEU's Russmedia decision poses significant challenges for companies operating in the digital media space in Europe. Daphne Keller's bio may be found at https://law.stanford.edu/daphne-keller/.  The Chapell regulatory outlook report may be found at https://chapellreport.substack.com/. Takeaways The Russmedia case shifts the EU rules on intermediary liability significantly. Intermediary liability laws aim to balance online safety, free speech, and innovation. The court's decision highlights a long-standing tension as between GDPR and the e-commerce directive. Platforms may now be considered joint controllers of user data under GDPR. Identifying harmful content at scale is a major challenge for platforms. The Russmedia case Chapters 00:00 Welcome and show premise 02:05 Daphne Keller and why Russmedia matters 04:00 Why intermediary liability shields exist 06:20 Distinction between Section 230 in the U.S. (absolute liability shield) and the EU notice and takedown regime under the e-commerce directive. 08:45 GDPRand right to be forgotten as background context. 11:00 Russmedia facts and Romanian state court path 13:45 Advocate General view processor vs controller 16:00 CJEU view as joint controllership is the lynchpin of the case. 23:30 Proactive checks and the general monitoring contradiction 34:40 What platforms can do now and the practical tradeoffs Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Host Alan Chapell welcomes Commissioner Mark Meador of the Federal Trade Commission to talk about the future of conservative antitrust, the importance of protecting kids and the impact of the regulatory environment on the digital media marketplace. Commissioner Meador's bio can be found at https://www.ftc.gov/about-ftc/commissioners-staff/mark-r-meador. The Chapell Report can be found at https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Takeaways Privacy and online safety for children are top priorities for the FTC. The FTC is focused on tangible harms rather than ethereal issues. Antitrust enforcement has seen a bipartisan consensus on the need for more action. The FTC uses 6B studies to understand new markets and inform future regulations. Learning from past FTC experiences is crucial for effective enforcement. AI and deceptive claims are monitored under existing laws. Consumer choice is essential in a competitive marketplace. The FTC is committed to enforcing laws that protect children online. Regulatory actions should avoid creating unintended consequences. Chapters 00:00 FTC Priorities for 2026 03:53 Antitrust Focus and Challenges 07:50 Protecting Children Online 12:08 The Role of 6B Studies 15:54 Learning from Past FTC Experiences 19:41 Addressing AI and Deceptive Claims 23:43 Consumer Choice and Market Dynamics 27:43 Key Takeaways for Digital Media Stakeholders Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Peter Craddock joins Alan Chapell to discuss the EU Digital Omnibus proposal - and debate the value of simplification of the digital privacy rules in Europe. Peter views these changes as pragmatic, while Alan is concerned that we’re trading in one set of ambiguities to another. More on Peter Craddock https://www.khlaw.com/people/peter-craddock. More on Alan's Regulatory Outlook Substack https://chapellreport.substack.com/welcome Takeaways Peter believes the Digital Omnibus changes are intended to add a layer of pragmatism to EU data protection law. The GDPR was designed to enshrine privacy as a fundamental right, but that doesn’t mean privacy should prevail over everything else. You also take into account other fundamental rights: fundamental right of information and freedom of expression. Chapters 00:00 Peter returns and sets the stage for what the EU Digital Omnibus is and why it exists. 04:20 How the proposal and Court of Justice rulings reshape the meaning of personal data for ad tech. 10:00 What pseudonymous companies can argue today under SRB and related cases. 15:40 Why ePrivacy consent rules still bite even if GDPR does not apply. 20:40 Browser-based consent controls and why industry expects pushback. 26:10 How regulators may respond, and why pragmatism is becoming more visible. 35:40 Legitimate interest for AI training versus consent for monetization. 41:00 Whether the changes help smaller players and what uncertainty remains. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Digital Omnibus proposal seeks to upend the EU data protection rules. In part 1 of our coverage, Alan Chapell chats with Dr Gabriela Zanfir-Fortuna of the Future of Privacy Forum about what's driving the Digital Omnibus, and whether it is likely to have a positive impact. More on Gabriela at https://fpf.org/person/dr-gabriela-zanfir-fortuna/. More on Alan's Substack at https://chapellreport.substack.com/. Takeaways The Digital Omnibus aims to simplify, reduce compliance burden and boost EU competitiveness, but may introduce new ambiguities and complexities.  Narrowing the definition of personal data could let some pseudonymous ad tech processing fall outside GDPR coverage. A browser level do not track style signal is proposed, yet timelines and technical feasibility remain uncertain given past failures and current standards backlogs. AI model training via legitimate interest raises difficult questions about privacy choices. Some EU regulators are likely to resist these shifts, meaning enforcement may stay privacy forward - creating a lack of certainty for those seeking to comply with these new rules.  Chapters 00:00 Alan introduces the show, the guest, and why the Digital Omnibus matters for GDPR and the AI Act. 03:40 Gabriela shares her privacy origin story and why privacy harms can be systemic, not just individual. 11:40 The pair unpack the Commission’s stated goals of simplification and competitiveness, and why Gabriela doubts the path. 17:00 They examine the proposed narrowed definition of personal data and the risk of fresh compliance confusion. 20:50 Discussion of a new consent revocation signal and the long road to workable standards. 26:40 A media services carve out is questioned, especially its impact on consent fatigue and digital ads. 32:00 Gabriela outlines the biggest AI related proposals, especially legitimate interest for training and use. 44:40 They predict regulator pushback and what that means for enforcement over the next decade. 50:30 Closing reflections on why the Omnibus may fail its simplification promise and what comes next. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, Alan chats with Vermont State Representative Monique Priestley about her multi-year attempt to get a privacy law passed in the State of Vermont. They discuss Vermont's approach, what Monique has learned from the successes and failures of other state efforts, and what a "good" privacy law looks like.  Rep Priestley's bio may be found at: https://priestleyvt.com/about/ The discussion re: Private Rights of Action in Privacy Laws with Dr. Lauren Scholz is available at: https://www.youtube.com/live/RVb8xXWkYPQ?si=sb89gvUiT_WzKYsp&t=2448. My reaction to Dr. Scholz's testimony is available on my Substack at: https://chapell.substack.com/p/more-on-the-private-right-of-action Takeaways Lobbying pressure shapes privacy bills long before the public ever sees them. Consumer rights only work if people can actually enforce them. Data minimization is essential but difficult to regulate. Political campaigns are major contributors to data misuse. States struggle to keep definitions aligned as technology shifts. Chapters 00:00 Origin story of Rep. Priestley 03:15 How lobbying shapes privacy legislation 08:10 What a strong privacy law should include 13:20 Why data minimization is so complicated 18:45 The role of political campaigns in data abuses 24:30 Data brokers and updates, states are pushing 31:40 Authorized agents and deletion requests 36:30 How Vermont approaches sensitive data Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Alan Butler from the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) joins Alan Chapell to discuss EPICs recent blog post critiquing the March 2025 decision of the French competition authority holding that Apple's App Tracking Transparency (ATT) is anti-competitive. This is a robust discussion pitting the views of the advocacy community against those of the business community... and demonstrating the tension that can sometimes exist between privacy and competition law.  The discussion referenced a number of articles and consumer research. Epic's blog post on ATT is at https://tinyurl.com/2avfss69 The French Competition decision is at https://tinyurl.com/27tav2dv Research from Columbia Univ is at https://tinyurl.com/399az6ht Research from USC is at https://tinyurl.com/55d76n87 Takeaways EPIC saw Apple’s App Tracking Transparency (ATT) as a rare, meaningful win for user privacy amid decades of unchecked data collection. Alan Butler draws a distinction as between first-party tracking and third-party behavioral tracking - a distinction that may be at odds with competition regulators such as the UK Competition and Markets Authority. Butler argued that consent pop-ups and CMPs are manipulative, not genuine privacy controls - Chapell agreed, but noted that Apple uses its own form of manipulation with ATT. European regulators viewed ATT as anti-competitive, but Butler said ATT rightly prioritizes user privacy over ad-tech interests. Chapell provided research suggesting that Apple's cohort tracking might not be as user-friendly as some advocates have suggested. Apple’s ad revenue growth in the wake of ATT raised competition and fairness concerns. Butler called for ad models that allow publisher sustainability without compromising user privacy. Chapters00:00 Introduction and EPIC’s role in privacy advocacy02:30 Apple’s App Tracking Transparency explained04:45 Ad-tech backlash and regulatory scrutiny in Europe06:15 First-party vs. third-party data use distinctions09:50 How tracking and profiling differ across contexts12:40 Consent mechanisms and why they fail users15:50 The “double consent” debate under EU law20:00 Competition concerns and privacy as a design choice24:30 Publisher monetization and skepticism of tracking’s value28:00 Intersection of privacy, competition, and market power31:30 Consumer understanding of ATT and tracking preferences34:00 Apple’s data use and the question of transparency37:00 Whether ATT unfairly advantages Apple41:00 Broader implications for competition and privacy balance45:30 Parity between ATT and consent systems discussed48:30 Closing reflections on privacy, fairness, and user control   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Cory Doctorow is a prolific writer of both fiction and non-fiction. His latest book is Enshittification: Why Everything Suddenly Went Wrong and What To Do About It. Cory and host Alan Chapell discuss the three stages of enshittification, its root causes, and the underlying social movement that is critical to addressing (and perhaps even reversing) its impact. Recognizing that they come at this from very different perspectives, Alan and Cory also go deep into some of the endemic challenges of the ads space while wrestling with pro's and con's of data minimization, contextual advertising and how to offer a private right of action to the enforcement of privacy laws.  Alan's Substack on CIPA the VPPA and anti-SLAPP laws is at https://chapell.substack.com/p/can-anti-slapp-save-ad-tech-from and should complement the discussion. Cory's bio is at ⁠https://craphound.com/bio/⁠ and you can find out more about his book Enshittification at ⁠https://tinyurl.com/y7u698a6⁠.  Takeaways Enshittification describes how digital platforms decay under monopoly power, shifting value from users to advertisers and then shareholders. Monopoly and weak regulation allow corporations to capture markets and regulators, eroding user rights and competition. Loss of interoperability and restrictive IP laws (like the DMCA) prevent users from fixing or improving technology. Privacy and data exploitation are central to tech monopolies’ power, stronger, simpler rules are needed over complex consent systems. Behavioral advertising should be replaced by contextual models to reduce surveillance and restore balance for publishers. Private right of action can help enforce privacy rights when regulators fail. Global antitrust movements in Europe, Canada, and Asia show more progress than the U.S. Coalition building across privacy, labor, and antitrust advocates is key to countering corporate concentration. Chapters00:00 Introduction and Enshittification explained04:20 How monopolies cause platform decay11:15 Market consolidation and regulatory capture13:30 Tech worker power and the loss of interoperability20:25 Key issues, privacy, competition, and IP27:25 Problems with consent-based privacy systems29:45 Case for banning behavioral advertising41:25 Enforcement and the role of private litigation51:00 Antitrust progress and shifting global momentum55:30 Building coalitions to fight tech monopolies Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The care and feeding of a successful career - particularly in privacy or regulatory circles remains an under-discussed topic. Career coach Doug Miller joins Alan to discuss the changing role of the privacy pro over the past two decades and the challenges we all face as we try to juggle the goals of making an impact while finding happiness.  Takeaways Privacy executives must engage with the organization to change minds. Building alliances is crucial for effective privacy advocacy. It's important to connect with C-suite members beyond the CEO. Understanding product launch goals can align privacy initiatives. Strategic thinking is essential for future planning in organizations. The context of the industry influences product implementation. Collaboration across teams enhances privacy efforts. Privacy considerations should be integrated into product development. Long-term planning is vital for organizational success. Effective communication can bridge gaps in understanding privacy needs. Career burnout for privacy and regulatory pros is real - Doug shares a number of tips for career development.  Chapters00:00  Introduction & Evolution of Privacy  04:20  Early Privacy Careers & AOL Story  07:30  Mergers, Culture & Lessons Learned  09:20  Shifting from Reactive to Proactive Privacy  16:30  Convincing Leadership & Building Value  20:50  Career Growth, Burnout & Reinvention  38:40  Curiosity, Purpose & Closing Thoughts   Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On this episode, Alan Chapell is joined by Connecticut State Senator James Maroney as the Senator shares the backstory regarding how he got involved in pushing for a privacy law in Connecticut, how those efforts are impacted by lobbying efforts, and how different states are collaborating to create the privacy and AI patchwork. The Senator also shares what's on his mind when it comes to future privacy and AI laws for Connecticut. The Senator's bio is available at https://www.senatedems.ct.gov/senator/james-maroney/bio" Takeaways Privacy policymaking often starts accidentally, not by design. Lobbying pressure remains the biggest barrier to passing strong privacy laws. Persistence and bipartisan cooperation helped Connecticut succeed after three years. The Global Privacy Control requirement made Connecticut a national privacy leader. Simplified opt-out processes improve user empowerment and enforcement. Consent fatigue weakens privacy protections; minimization is a better path. Broad definitions of personal data can discourage privacy innovation. Data brokers and AI oversight are the next frontiers in state privacy policy. Multi-state collaboration is reshaping privacy and AI governance in the U.S. Federal law should set a strong floor, not a ceiling, for privacy protections. Chapters 00:00 Introduction and Senator Maroney’s background 01:00 How privacy legislation found him 02:32 Early challenges and heavy lobbying resistance 05:04 Lessons from failed attempts and building allies 07:46 Adding the Global Privacy Control requirement 10:02 Balancing consent fatigue with real user protection 12:45 Defining personal vs. de-identified data 15:31 Strengthening Connecticut’s law through updates 17:47 Considering data broker oversight and the DELETE Act 20:31 Multi-state collaboration and AI policy efforts 23:45 Regulating sensitive data and consent standards 27:00 Authorized agents and consumer rights limits 31:02 Rulemaking challenges and avoiding patchwork laws 35:32 Federal preemption, enforcement, and private actions 40:30 Enforcement, lawsuits, and the search for balance 43:00 Closing remarks and UConn basketball predictions Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Journalist Patrick McGee joins host Alan Chapell to discuss his book "Apple in China" as Alan draws additional pearls of wisdom from Patrick's work that can be used to guide everyone working in the digital media and regulatory world. From an in-depth discussion of geopolitics, a funny Seinfeld reference and (and a less funny one about Michael Moore) and important lessons for regulatory folks looking to hold your attention.... this is a great discussion. It's also helpful for everyone in the ads space to have a clear sense of Apple's motivations. You can buy Apple in China here - https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Apple-in-China/Patrick-McGee/9781668053379 Takeaways Apple’s design-first philosophy thrived in China’s uniquely flexible manufacturing ecosystem. The partnership between Apple and China turned into a masterclass in innovation — and imitation “China speed” gave Apple unmatched production agility, but also trained future competitors. Apple underestimated how much intellectual property and know-how it was exporting. Patrick McGee frames Apple’s China story as both a business triumph and a geopolitical shift. Privacy remains central to Apple’s brand — but compromises in China tell a more complex story. The book reveals how Apple’s success fueled China’s tech dominance and influenced global policy. Regulatory lessons: even the biggest players can be blinded by their own success. Patrick’s storytelling turns a complex supply chain saga into an engaging, human narrative.Alan Chapell emphasizes that clear storytelling is key to making policy and economics resonate. Chapters 00:00 Introduction and Guest Welcome 00:52 The Premise Behind Apple in China 03:10 How Apple’s Design Culture Met China’s Flexibility 05:40 Training the Competition: The Hidden Cost of Outsourcing 08:15 “China Speed” and the Rise of Domestic Tech Rivals 12:20 Apple’s Privacy Paradox in the Chinese Market 15:05 Lessons for Regulators and Global Businesses 17:45 Storytelling as a Tool for Complex Topics 19:30 Reflections on Apple’s Future and Geopolitical Risks 21:00 Supporting Local Bookstores and Final Thoughts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Alan Chapell continues his discussion with Jon Leibowitz on some of the key regulatory issues raised from 2004 - 2013. This includes the investigation re: Google Buzz and Google's settlement of FTC charges it Misrepresented Privacy Assurances to Users of Apple's Safari Internet Browser (which Alan believes had a huge impact on Google's approach to probabilistic advertising). They also talk about the historical regulatory role of telecommunications companies vs edge providers like Google and Meta as well as a discussion of the ongoing antitrust cases Google is facing.  Takeaways First-party data has real limits; it isn’t a universal fix. The FTC’s Intel case shows antitrust can unlock competition (e.g., aiding Nvidia’s rise). Journalism’s sustainability is strained by dominant platforms; collective bargaining may help. Google’s 2012 Safari case (rooted in earlier Buzz issues) became a lasting privacy deterrent. Privacy enforcement reshaped ads, pushing platforms away from third-party data tactics. Structural vs. behavioral remedies: breakups are rare; well-designed conduct rules often carry the day. Chrome divestiture was viewed as overreach; Judge Mehta’s search remedies felt cautious. Consent fatigue is real; data minimization and retention limits may work better. Privacy trade-offs vary by socioeconomic context; one-size rules can entrench incumbents. The ad-supported web has eras: DoubleClick (’94–’03), Google’s ascent (’04–’13), then Big Tech dominance. Chapters 00:09 Introduction & episode setup; first-party data riff; sponsor note 02:06 Intel case lessons; exclusivity, APIs, and competition effects 04:02 Journalism town halls (2009–10); platforms, news economics, misinformation 08:54 Google Safari cookie-circumvention case; ties to Google Buzz order 12:30 Consent vs. probabilistic advertising; platform caution post-settlement 15:00 Privacy trade-offs across economic classe 15:50 Google Search remedies; amicus brief; Chrome divestiture debate 23:30 Remedies are hard: structural vs. behavioral; Microsoft as precedent 26:00 Post-FTC: privacy coalition with Mary Bono; telco vs. edge provider rules 29:31 Rulemaking hurdles (Mag-Moss); unrealized federal privacy push 30:27 Regulation can entrench incumbents; EU lessons for startups 32:01 Data minimization & retention over blanket consent 32:50 Closing: three eras of the ad-supported internet; subscribe CTA Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Host Alan Chapell is joined by Jon Leibowitz, former chair of the FTC to discuss the Commission's impact on the digital media landscape from 2004 until 2013. In part 1 of the discussion, Chapell and Mr. Leibowitz talk about the FTC's COPPA rethink, the DNT standard, some early FTC attempts to rethink journalism, and some of the antitrust and privacy enforcements against big tech during his tenure. Jon Leibowitz' bio may be found here - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jon_Leibowitz.  Takeaways The FTC’s push for “Do Not Track” showed how hard it is to get industry consensus on privacy. Global Privacy Control may succeed where “Do Not Track” failed, as cookies phase out. COPPA’s update made pseudonymous data count as personal data, reshaping online advertising. Age verification measures create new risks, even while aiming to protect children. Industry self-regulation (like ad icons) fell short, with state laws setting stronger standards. The FTC’s “bully pulpit” speeches often influenced industry behavior more than enforcement. Google’s acquisitions (DoubleClick, AdMob, etc.) raised competition questions but were welcomed by much of the ad industry. The tension between innovation, regulation, and consumer protection continues to shape digital advertising. Chapters00:00 Introductions & Setting the Scene03:00 Achievements at the FTC: Early Digital Ad Regulation08:00 The Rise and Stall of “Do Not Track”15:00 Protecting Kids Online & COPPA’s Redefinition of Data24:00 Self-Regulation vs. State Regulation in Ads32:00 Antitrust and Google’s Expansion40:00 Closing Reflections on Innovation and Oversight Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

UK data protection pro Robert Bateman joins host Alan Chapell to discuss how the EU seems to be heading in the opposite direction than the U.S. as the CJEU narrows the definition of personal data ever so slightly. Robert also shares thoughts on a cookie consent consult taking place in the UK - and gives a prediction on the future of EU to U.S. cross-border transfers.  Takeaways The definition of personal data has evolved significantly since the GDPR. Pseudonymization is often misunderstood and oversold in its benefits. The SRB case clarified the relative nature of personal data definitions. ICO's consultation may lead to significant changes in cookie regulations. Cross-border data transfers are essential for the digital economy. The adequacy decision ensures data safety when transferring data to the US. Max Schrems' challenges have significantly impacted data transfer frameworks. The ICO's approach to enforcement may signal a shift in privacy regulations. The role of journalism is crucial in understanding and shaping data protection issues. Different perspectives in data protection can foster better dialogue and solutions. Chapters 00:00 Evolving Definitions of Personal Data 06:03 The SRB Case and Its Implications 11:45 Rethinking Privacy Regulations in the UK 17:59 Cross-Border Data Transfers and Their Importance 29:40 Challenges to the EU-US Data Privacy Framework 35:43 The Role of Journalism in Data Protection Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week, Tobias Judin from Norway's data protection regulator, the Datatilsynet (and EDPB representative), joins host Alan Chapell to talk about trust, (mis)aligned incentives, and consent in the European ads marketplace. We go deep on the challenges around pay or consent models for digital media as the EDPB plans to issue guidance for the larger publishing industry. Will pay or consent save the publishing industry - or become a drag on data protection law? Alan refers to the NOYB guidance on pay or consent, so we're sharing that here: https://noyb.eu/sites/default/files/2025-07/Pay_or_Okay_Report_2025_web.pdf. Takeaways Data protection can enhance a company's competitive edge. The EDPB aims for harmonized GDPR interpretation across Europe. Consent mechanisms are often misunderstood and misapplied. Behavioral advertising creates challenges for data protection compliance. The current consent model may not be sustainable long-term. Pay for consent could lead to inequities in data protection. Size and scale of data processing influence regulatory focus. Trust in data handling can lead to increased ad revenue. The GDPR's fairness principle needs reevaluation. Data protection is essential for supporting democracy. Chapters 00:00 Introduction to Data Protection in Europe 01:18 Understanding the Role of the EDPB 04:42 Data Protection as a Competitive Advantage 08:41 The Challenges of Consent Mechanisms 11:54 Proportionality in Data Processing 16:42 The Future of Behavioral Advertising 21:53 The Concept of Pay for Consent 26:58 The Role of Size and Scale in Data Protection Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week, host Alan Chapell is joined by Daniel Hanley of the Open Markets Institute as they attempt to make legal sense of Judge Mehta's September 2, 2025, decision in the Google Search Antitrust case. In other words, they outline "WHY" the Google decision is legally problematic.    Takeaways Judge Mehta’s remedies ruling left major loopholes for Google. Judicial caution and AI narratives diluted strong enforcement. DOJ missed chances to highlight Google’s credibility problems. Structural remedies were avoided despite clear legal precedent. Publishers and competitors remain vulnerable under weak remedies. Chapters 00:01 Setting the Stage: Google’s regulatory storm and Mehta’s decision.01:30 From Liability to Remedies: Strong liability ruling vs. weak remedies.04:20 Why the Pullback?: Judicial caution and Google’s AI framing.12:30 Legal Inconsistencies: Contradictory remedies undermine competition.25:10 Appeals and Outlook: Next steps for Google, DOJ, and the states. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Cobun Zweifel-Keegan joins host Alan Chapell to discuss key themes around U.S. state efforts to enforce on privacy AI and consumer protection. We talk about regulatory tension between the federal and state governments, the key areas of focus at the state level and the impact of state enforcement. We also riff a bit on Alan's recent Substack article comparing Spotify's Panama Playlists with the 1987 events leading up to the Video Privacy Protection Act - https://chapell.substack.com/p/why-congress-will-pass-a-privacy.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Alan Chapell is joined by Justin Evan's where they discuss his book: The Little Book of Data. While designed for business teams, the book (and the podcast) also lights a path that can be helpful to the legal and regulatory folks. Our conversation also makes broader points about the creative process and how to stay relevant in your career by remaining curious.  Check out the Little Book of Data at https://www.harpercollinsleadership.com/9781400248353/the-little-book-of-data/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, Alan is joined by Shoshana Wodinsky, veteran journalist in the ads space turned tech expert for the Federal Trade Commission. Shoshana offers an unfiltered view of how things sometimes function at the Commission - and shares some insights on how recent FTC policies impact the ads space. Takeaways The U.S. lacks a national privacy law, relying on state laws. The FTC has historically set privacy standards. Lina Khan's leadership marked a shift in consumer protection. The Office of Technology was created to address tech issues. Bureaucracy can slow down regulatory processes significantly. Investigations can sometimes feel like fishing expeditions. The FTC's approach to bias in advertising raises questions. Legal theories in advertising can be complex and vague. Collaboration among commissioners is crucial for effective regulation. Upholding the truth is essential in regulatory work. Chapters 00:00 Introduction to Privacy and Regulation 03:08 The Role of the FTC in Privacy Standards 05:43 Lina Khan's Impact on Consumer Protection 08:53 Navigating Between Technology and Economics 11:33 The Challenges of Bureaucracy in Regulation 14:45 Investigating Bias in Advertising 17:30 The Complexity of Legal Theories 20:16 The Nature of FTC Investigations 23:16 The Balance of Ideology in the FTC 26:32 The Future of Privacy Regulation 29:29 Conclusion and Reflections on FTC Dynamics Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this episode, Alan discusses Contextual Integrity as applied to the ad space with Professor Helen Nissenbaum. They go deep into profiling and the use of PETs. Alan encourages listeners to check out some of Helen's writing at https://nissenbaum.tech.cornell.edu/main_cv.html#pub Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Kamyl Bazbaz and Joseph Jerome from DuckDuckGo join Alan to discuss the role of the browser, the intersection between privacy and competition and how DuckDuckGo differentiates itself within the craziness of larger ads space.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Ari Paparo and Alan Chapell discuss Ari's new book Yield: How Google Bought, Built, and Bullied its Way to Advertising Dominance. They also talk about the potential impact of the fallout of Google's antitrust trials on the marketplace. And Ari provides some insights as to why it's difficult for privacy and regulatory issues to make their way into the C-suite. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Megan Gray joins host Alan Chapell for a discussion of the various remedies being proposed in the Google Search Antitrust Trial with the DOJ as we head towards Judge Mehta's decision in that case later this summer.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Meta antitrust trial has been undercovered with in the ads space. Host Alan Chapell brings antitrust litigator Brendan Benedict on to get a sense of the core arguments of both the FTC and Meta and make some predictions on how this case will play out.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Former Director of the Bureau of Consumer Protection at the FTC Samuel AA Levin joins Alan Chapell to discuss a recent law review article he co-authored, how privacy and consumer protection were undercut during the 1980's, and how the Lina Kahn FTC sought to bring them back. Within the context of the digital ads space, they discussed: DNT, Industry self-regulation, notice and choice and the pro's and con's of a harms based approach.  Check out the Stanford Law Review article Sam co-authored with Lina Kahn and Stephanie T. Nguyen titled: After Notice and Choice: Reinvigorating “Unfairness” to Rein In Data Abuses. The article is available at: https://www.stanfordlawreview.org/print/article/after-notice-and-choice-reinvigorating-unfairness-to-rein-in-data-abuses/ Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Host Alan Chapell moderates a debate between Erez Levin (buy-side) and Gareth Glaser (sell-side) on how the ad tech marketplace is shifting while interjecting a few nuggets about the role of privacy and competition as we look towards 2026 and beyond.  Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices