The Guardian
topics

Phorm Says ISP Trialists Not Looking To Defect

imagePhorm is on the defensive again. This morning, we got this statement: “There is no substance to today’s New Media Age story. Over the last year there have been continuous attempts to create the illusion that Phorm’s ISP partners are parting ways with the company. This is yet another example of such a story, which has no basis in fact.”

What story? NMA had reported potential Phorm trialist Virgin Media (NSDQ: VMED) confirming it’s talking with behavioural ad targeting rival Audience Science, and an anonymous Virgin “source” as saying the ISP “wouldn’t be going ahead with” Phorm. The mag also says BT (NYSE: BT) is taking ad networks’ views about its Phorm trial, suggesting - albeit with no citation - the ISPs are “seeking alternatives”. Both denied by Phorm.

Virgin is on record as being on the fence. Despite being one of three ISPs to sign its initial interest, CEO Neil Berkett told a November investors’ conference in New York: “Our next initiative probably won’t be with the Phorms of the world” - it’s Phorm launch is “if”, not “when”. Phorm CEO Kent Ertugrul (pictured) in February said BT will “most definitely” launch Phorm in full this year; little word from BT.

Phorm tabled a press conference on Tuesday but canceled, preferring a statement, which has not yet appeared. The company wants to help publishers profit from more highly targeted ads by sitting on ISP networks to anonymously gather and profile a user’s every web visit. Whilst earlier skepticism came only from digital liberties quarters, as it now tries to build its business Phorm is taking a material pounding - the European Commission has said the UK government erred when it gave Phorm an effective green light and has ordered laws be changed, while Wikipedia has joined Amazon (NSDQ: AMZN) in asking Phorm not to record visits by their users. If more sites pull out, gaps open up in the proposition.

It’s a PR nightmare for Phorm, with every new statement walking a tightrope between debunking perceived myth and fanning the flames still further. But at stake is the kind of profit struggling online publishers, too, can make - and we don’t think this story is quite over yet.

Update: MPs announced an investigation in to internet traffic snooping and bandwidth throttling. Via Register.

Related Stories
Apr 22, 2009 6:20 AM ET
Share

Posted In: Advertising

  • It's not only members of the general public that don't want it, but it's people who run websites that also don't want it.

    If I pay to put a website online, and pay to attract users to it, why on earth would I want some third party company to listen in on my conversations with my users so they can resell that data and profit off me? Where's the benefit for me?

  • The key fact about Phorm is that every member of the general public who knows about Phorm despises it. Wikipedia opted out because doing so was in the interest of our readers (who all us volunteers do all this for), but also because publicity is what will finally kill off this odious parasite.

Covering the UK’s Digital Media Economy | paidContent:UK Newsletter

Know something we don’t?

Send Us a News Tip

All tips are anonymous and untraced.

Sponsors

Contributors