Do you – or anyone you know – really want to be targeted?

Just the term conjures up images of bulls-eyes, shooting ranges and scenes from the movie Minority Report. Little wonder that we don’t have a desire to be targeted. Yet targeting is core to marketing in all its forms, from creating and maintaining a database to developing an online/offline strategy. And every so often – and it is becoming quite often — the discussion about targeting also triggers a debate about personal privacy.

Understandably, it’s a volatile issue that raises as many tempers as it does questions. Case in point: the backlash when people learned the truth about Facebook’s privacy policies and the company’s tepid initial response. This week we learned the details about how Apple collects location information from iPhone devices (and hence, their users) — data it yields to help marketers target consumers.

Apple’s policy should be no surprise to iPhone users. The intent to collect and share this personal data is spelled out in the company’s terms and conditions. It states: ““Apple and its partners and licensees may provide certain services through your iPhone that rely upon location information. To provide and improve these services, where available, Apple and its partners and licensees may transmit, collect, maintain, process and use your location data, including the real-time geographic location of your iPhone, and location search queries. The location data and queries collected by Apple are collected in a form that does not personally identify you and may be used by Apple and its partners and licensees to provide and improve location-based products and services.” It continues: “By using any location-based services on your iPhone, you agree and consent to Apple’s and its partners’ and licensees’ transmission, collection, maintenance, processing and use of your location data and queries to provide and improve such products and services. You may withdraw this consent at any time by going to the Location Services setting on your iPhone and either turning off the global Location Services setting or turning off the individual location settings of each location-aware application on your iPhone. Not using these location features will not impact the non location-based functionality of your iPhone. When using third party applications or services on the iPhone that use or provide location data, you are subject to and should review such third party’s terms and privacy policy on use of location data by such third party applications or services.”

 Detailed? Yes. Completely transparent and understandable? Well, maybe.

Does it comfort people and put their minds at ease? Not a chance. Where this issue is headed it easy enough to predict. Think of the money (billions of dollars) involved in targeting and marketing. Despite politicians getting into the conversation this week, it’s not likely that we can expect dramatic changes forced by regulators, at least not any time soon. You know where President Barack Obama went this week, right? To Facebook to get a photo opportunity with Facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg. Zuckerberg also moderated a town hall event — no doubt to show off Obama’s social media savvy just as the run-up to the 2012 elections begins.

So, where will the debate about personal privacy likely lead? It will likely stall, a development that will only accelerate demand by consumers for terms and conditions (related to targeting, advertising and location, for example) that are clearly visible, completely transparent and 100-percent understandable. What will work? Ultimately, it’s all about the consumer and getting their permission. If they want to be targeted (because it ensures they will get offers they really want) or enter into a reward arrangement such as a mobile loyalty club, then they will tell us. Any other approach (that doesn’t require opt-in) is likely to backfire.

(More from my MSearchGroove column here http://bit.ly/f1O7RI)

Not that I was thinking this way, but what if I believed, Gosh, I have a lot of Twitter followers and I want to be treated like royalty. To end my week of interesting interactions, last night I ended up with a rather uncooked expensive piece of halibut at a nice restaurant called bin on the lake in Kirkland, WA. This despite my ask to have the halibut cooked medium well rather than the usual medium rare restaurants in the Northwest typically choose to prepare. The establishment did not ask me if I was a big shot. It did not (as far as I know) go onto Twitter to see if I have a following. What did it do?

• Apologize profusely
• Prepare a new piece of fish the way I wanted it cooked
• Send me a salad while I was waiting so my wife and I wouldn’t eat at separate times
• Offer us free dessert
• Take the price of the halibut off the bill (despite the fact that it was the most expensive item)

My point in telling this story? The restaurant performed admirably. It had nothing to do with my clout or any supposed influence that I have. It was purely good business. And worthy of a return visit – we already have a date picked out.

Comcast isn’t Nordstrom. But can it be? First off, my bad when I didn’t pay attention to the timing of the early bird pricing on the Major League Baseball season package. After seeing the $199 price online yesterday morning, I phoned Comcast, my cable television provider for 10 years and a bundle customer (including Web and phone) for about the past two. Comcast’s customer service rep listened to my ask – to receive the $20 price break – then told me the deal had expired the previous day. “I’m a long-time customer, spend a lot of money with you, and have service on six televisions.” Nothing gave so I hung up. An hour later, I called back and asked for a supervisor. The rep went off the line for about 10 minutes only to come back to chastise me for calling back when I was told no. I again asked for a price break – my fault on the late call but I spend about $250 a month with Comcast – and was told it wasn’t going to happen. “How about a $20 credit for being such a good customer?” No and no. I took my story to Twitter and @comcastcares who quickly responded by asking me to send my story to an email address. On my answering machine last night, Comcast called to ask me to take a survey about my customer service experience. They don’t read their files or Twitter? This morning, Executive Customer Care emailed me and said in part, “We do value you greatly as a customer and completely understand that in today’s economy that there are many ways to obtain entertainment service and it is a choice of our customers to choose Comcast for their phone, internet and TV service. We cannot thank you enough for your dedication to us as a company and for helping us keep our commitment to quality customer care. “I would like to offer you the MLB season pass, free of charge to you should you still wish to order this package.” Nordstrom-esque, wouldn’t you say? Of course, I screwed up initially by failing to call during the introductory pricing period. But I expected to be treated like a valued customer at what I call a brand’s Moments of Trust. How do you rate Comcast’s performance? Beyond that, was I right to ask Comcast to correct my wrong?

Is a consumer’s mobile search more valuable to an advertiser than an online query? The stats say yes, particularly in view of the growth in local mobile search. According to the BIA/Kelsey Group, one in three mobile searches is local in nature and also interactive. After searchers on their smartphones find a local business, 61 percent call the establishment and 59 percent visit the location. Little wonder that the market is more bullish about search advertising on mobile. Mediapost recounts a recent webinar with The Search Agency by sharing some stats and forecasts http://bit.ly/egqJhO.  For a start, Google estimates that between 15 and 30 percent of site traffic will come from mobile devices within the next 18 months. Google says mobile-only campaigns generate significantly higher click-through rates (CTR). Specifically, advertisers who break out mobile campaigns see CTR rise — on the average — 11.5 percent, according to Google. The biggest surprise here is the number of interactions that occur after the search is completed on a mobile device. After all, to influence some 60 percent of consumers to do anything (in this case call or visit a business) is a marketer’s dream. As more smartphones hit the market (a development I discuss in the item below), mobile search will also rise in importance — and cracking the code on how to rank highly in search results (this time on mobile) will (once again) be top of marketers’ minds. More in my MSearchGroove column - http://www.msearchgroove.com/added-value-for-marketers-in-mobile-search-apple-itunes-purchase-data/

A question often posed by marketers is whether mobile replaces email in integrated campaigns. In many cases, the two are complementary. I discuss the particulars April 19 in a free webinar with WhatCounts. Registration is here http://bit.ly/ePZCGQ

If Apple is anything, it is unpredictable. I’ve been quite amused this week by the pundits and industry analysts who claim Apple will delay the introduction of the iPhone 5. I have to wonder where they have been (or how well they really know Apple). Steve Jobs likes a little drama (and fun). Just think how many times Steve closed his speeches with “Just one more thing”– right before springing some of the industry’s biggest surprises on us. Cases in point: the introduction of the iMac and iPod. Earlier this week, and as per usual this time of year, Apple invited software developers to its Worldwide Development Conference (WWDC) taking place June 6-10 in San Francisco.  The invitation said the focus of the show will be iOS and Mac OS. Then the speculation began. A headline at Business Insider (which seems to have gotten one step ahead of itself here) claimed “Apple’s iPhone 5 Delay Just Opened The Door For Google And Microsoft.” Another headline went out a similar limb asserting “Here’s Why Apple’s iPhone ‘Delays’ Might Actually Be A Good Thing.” What’s so “good” about it? Business Insider sees it this way: “While some may see this as an ‘un-Apple like’ “delay, this habit-breaking might actually be a good thing — for would-be iPhone buyers, Apple fans, and investors. Why? Because Apple needs another smartphone breakthrough, like the first iPhone was in 2007.” Whether you are in California, Cancun or Copenhagen, you probably can hear the laughter coming from Apple’s Cupertino office. Of course, I have no inside information but I do suspect a ruse here. Think it through – carefully. Why would Apple deny the rumors now when the company has a chance to surprise us (again) and deliver a game-changer during the keynote? Admittedly, I could be wrong about this. Until we know for sure marketers would be ill-advised to plan strategy and campaigns based on the iPhone 4 (suddenly regarded by some as a stale device in the marketplace) and give up on iPhone 5 just yet. (The above first appeared at www.msearchgroove.com. Please see the rest of the column here - http://www.msearchgroove.com/apple-likely-has-last-laugh-again-googles-in-app-payments-could-change-the-game/)