The wave of privacy protection has also affected TV ratings

The impact of the revision of the Personal Information Protection Act and the strengthening of protection for personal data is now reaching television, which at first glance seems unrelated to personal information.

Discussions are underway at the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications' study group on the acquisition and use of television viewing data (non-specific viewing history). In this article, I would like to summarize the discussions at the study group and consider future prospects.

Status of discussion on the use of non-specific viewing history and obtaining consent

The Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications states,Study Group on the Use of Viewing Data in the Broadcasting Sector and Privacy Protection" and is discussing how to obtain the data that will be used to calculate television viewership ratings.

Currently, when you turn on a television connected to the Internet, the following information (hereinafter, the acquired and transmitted information will be collectively referred to as "viewing data") is automatically sent to the broadcasting station's server at regular intervals while you are watching a program. This information does not contain any information that can identify a specific individual, and is classified as "non-specific viewing history" (see table below).

• Viewing time
• ID to identify the broadcasting station
• IP Addresses on the Internet
• Postal code information
• Information to identify a television receiver, etc.

The issue being discussed at the study group is that, in the process of acquiring viewing data, the information transmitted is considered to be "non-specific viewing history" that cannot identify a specific individual, butWhether or not to obtain prior consent from viewersIs.

The current system is such that unless the viewer disables the transmission function, the acquisition of this data cannot be stopped. Since non-specific viewing history is not information that can identify a specific individual, it is not subject to the Personal Information Protection Act, but it is information derived from an individual.,From the perspective of protecting personal information, there is a debate over its acquisition..This is the first point of contention.

Another topic of discussion is how to respond to the Personal Information Protection Law regarding the use of information. For some time now, businesses (advertisers) have been saying that they want to use viewing data to analyze customer information. From the business (advertiser) perspective, this is only natural, since the effectiveness of advertising varies depending on the time of day and the attributes of the people watching.

Regarding this point, the above-mentioned committee stated that "non-specific viewing history isIsn't it necessary to obtain consent when providing information to a third party?" This discussion is based on the perspective of the revised Personal Information Protection Act, which will come into effect on April 2022, 4.

To summarize the discussions at the above-mentioned study group, the main points of discussion can be summarized as follows:

①Is it really appropriate to obtain information that can easily identify an individual by comparing it with a database of IP addresses and other information without the individual's consent?

② What is the appropriate way to deal with cases where non-identified viewing history is converted into personal information by the destination? The Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications is expected to announce its policy on this matter soon, but in this article we will take a moment to summarize the current state of discussion on the above two points before then.

Discussion 1: Is it appropriate to obtain information that can easily identify an individual by comparing it with a database of IP addresses and other information without the individual's consent?

As mentioned at the beginning, when you turn on a TV connected to the Internet, viewing data is sent to the broadcasting station's server while you are watching a program. This data transmission function is set to continue automatically unless the viewer sets the TV receiver not to transmit anonymous viewing history.

in this way,In principle, data collection is free, but if a person wishes to refuse, they can go through the process of individually stopping the collection, known as the "opt-out method (*1)."That.

The system for collecting viewing data itself does not pose a problem under the current Personal Information Protection Act, even if it is later linked to personal information. Data that cannot identify personal information by itself does not fall under the definition of "personal information" under the Personal Information Protection Act, and therefore does not require the consent of or notification to the individual.

However, thanks to recent technological innovations, even information that cannot identify an individual by itself can easily be linked to an individual using a database composed of IP addresses, etc.

Under these circumstances, isn't it inappropriate to adopt a system that collects anonymous viewing history on an opt-out basis as a way to handle data related to individuals?This is the first point of argument.

Currently, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications' study group is continuing to exchange opinions on whether to collect viewing data using an opt-out system, or whether to use both the opt-out and opt-in systems depending on the purpose of using the viewing data.

Methods of obtaining consent are being examined in these discussions. In other words, when multiple people live together in one household, it would be ideal to obtain consent from each person individually, but the issue at hand is how to obtain consent individually. It is unlikely that a consent screen will appear on a television, as is the case with the Internet. Furthermore, unlike mobile phones, not every person has their own television. It is necessary to overcome the issue of "obtaining consent" in such situations from both a legal and technical perspective, and it is necessary to continue discussing what kind of system will emerge in the future.

(*1) Opt-in and opt-out: Opt-in refers to sending and receiving information after obtaining the user's prior consent. The Personal Information Protection Act requires prior consent to be obtained in principle when acquiring personal information. In contrast, opt-out refers to a business obtaining information without obtaining prior consent from the user, and providing the user with a mechanism to refuse to provide information to or receive information from the business. A business that receives a refusal from the user will stop sending and receiving information.

Discussion 2: What is the appropriate way to handle cases where anonymous viewing history is converted into personal information by the provider?

Companies obtain various customer data in various ways for customer information analysis. Targeted advertising is a method of delivering more targeted advertising by combining and analyzing various customer information (customer information, location information, purchase information, and internet browsing information). For many years, viewing data has been one of the customer information that companies would like to use in such business activities.

However, due to the revised Personal Information Protection Act that will come into effect on April 2022, 4,"Personal Information"The system will be introduced.Even if the information is not linked to an individual at the time of collection, if it is expected to be provided to a third party and used by that party as data linked to an individual, consent must be obtained for the provision to the third party.Becomes

If this system is introduced, even if the viewing history is non-specific, if the broadcasting station that collected the non-specific viewing history provides the non-specific viewing history to a research company that is expected to cross-reference it with personal data, consent will need to be obtained from the individual before providing the information to a third party. In this regard, the law assumes that "consent will be obtained by the recipient." However, it is also possible for "consent to be obtained by the source of the information," and considering actual customer contact points, consent may well be obtained by the source of the information. In any case, it is necessary to organize things so that there are no "omissions in obtaining consent" among the relevant parties.

Finally

When acquiring data, it is necessary to stop and think for a moment about how much data is needed.

Of course, to ensure the accuracy of the data, a certain number is necessary, and it is best to have a sufficient number. However, as regulations on the protection of personal information progress,Do not collect personal information that does not need to be collectedThis stance is becoming more widespread. From this point of view, it is also necessary to consider how much of a target number is needed beyond the required number. Naturally, the target of this "target number" will change depending on how the data is used. Our company measures the effectiveness of advertising using data science based on statistics, and has a wealth of knowledge about statistics. We believe that it is our responsibility to research the "necessary target number" for effectiveness measurement, disseminate it, and make it a social asset.

In addition, when viewed in the context of "viewing data for targeted advertising," users are increasingly avoiding targeted advertising these days, and the amendment to the Personal Information Protection Law has led to increased restrictions on the acquisition of information linked to individuals. In fact, the Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications has decided to introduce a regulation that requires "notification to users when providing their Internet site browsing history to third parties."As restrictions on targeted advertising using personal information become stronger, how far can targeting methods linked to individuals hold up? As revisions to the Personal Information Protection Law continue, is it still legal?These are questions we must constantly ask.

On the other hand,The role of television is changingIt is also important to have this perspective. Data is so valuable that it is called the "oil of the 21st century," and in that sense, "television" is a kind of "oil field." If "television" is positioned as a data platform and more efficient corporate activities can be carried out based on the use of data, the sustainability of companies and society will change.

The positioning of "television" and the use of data related to it. The progress of this study group is something we cannot take our eyes off.

Takeshi Fukushima
General Manager of Legal Affairs Department, Corporate Headquarters, XICA Corporation

Graduated from Waseda University Law School in 2013. Registered as an attorney in 2015 and currently affiliated with Kollect Partners Law Office. As an attorney, he has been involved in social business support, securities compliance, new business development support, and corporate crisis management. In July 2021, he joined XICA as head of the legal department.