122
If Britain is so bothered by China, why do these .gov.uk sites use Chinese ad brokers?
(www.theregister.com)
First of all, why would government websites have ads?
this post was submitted on 27 Apr 2024
122 points (96.2% liked)
United Kingdom
4109 readers
316 users here now
General community for news/discussion in the UK.
Less serious posts should go in !casualuk@feddit.uk or !andfinally@feddit.uk
More serious politics should go in !uk_politics@feddit.uk.
Try not to spam the same link to multiple feddit.uk communities.
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.
Posts should be related to UK-centric news, and should be either a link to a reputable source, or a text post on this community.
Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.
If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread.
Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.
Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Because Tory cuts mean the money to run these websites has to be found elsewhere.
I haven't seen any ads on them but then I'm using UBO. Seems plausible that they're using visitor data as a revenue stream though. Sort of like how the BBC does not show us ads but sells its content internationally.
Seems plausible that they’re using visitor data as a revenue stream though.
That's even more concerning.
Yep. Government dont give a shit about anything.
Nevermind using chinese ad brokers why do .gov.uk websites have ads in the first place lol?
These seem to be mostly websites for small city/district councils, who have never had huge budgets, and their budgets have been cut by the current central government.
My guess is either:
- Someone thought it was a quick way to add a few quid to the budget
- They were offered a discount by the contractor who runs their website if they allowed ads
- Some dodgy contractor inserted the ads without telling the council, because they thought nobody would notice, and they're owned by a councillor's nephew.
The UK has come to terms with it's inexorable slide into developing nation status and figured it might as well shill a few boner pills along the way.
UK sounds desperate for any revenue to show a lower deficit %. It can't increase revenues by raising taxes on the rich so it does silly shit like this.
They don't as far as I'm aware, I'm not sure what this post is about. They definitely don't have ads on.
Maybe they're trying to get analytics service at no cost, if that's something offered by the ad broker? Easier than trying to fight for funding for it? It does seem kind of odd.
Maybe they're ads for their own government services? Technically, an adverstment doesn't have to just be for skeezy companies trying to steal your info or money.
Like your on the drivers license pages and you see a space on the side that "advertises" getting your license renewed. It's more flashy and draws attention more than just a link to help people find what they're looking for easier.
Not in the UK, but my official city page has 3 advertments prior to getting to the body of the page (which is the offical link tree). One for reporting a concern, one for the recreation department, and a rotating one for more receration stuff and the transparency department.
Why would you need an ad broker to advertise your own shit. Like just put it there? Using the ad broker would be all of the same work except with more middleman.
Idk, maybe they get all the analytics, like someone else mentioned.
I just know there are "ads" on government websites I've seen that don't necessarily follow the traditional concept of what we've come to know as advertisements, but are adverstments none the less. How they're set up, and what function they serve beyond directing people to a different place, is beyond me.
Maybe I should have phrased it differently... Adverstments aren't always from sketchy companies stealing your info, sometimes they're from sketchy governments too...
Military and intelligence services are bothered by China. The government not so much. The conservatives are happy to sell our nuclear and communication infrastructure to China. It was the backlash in the media that made them change course.
The British government agreed to allow China to work on nuclear power stations in the UK, it was the intelligence service that made them reduce Chinas access to its design and operation.
This is the same government that stopped the EU from restricting cheap Chinese steel into the EU (prior to Brexit). Recently the UK closed one of its major steel manufacturers. We can only recycle steel in the UK now.
Steels needed for boats and tanks. Especially if a land war in Europe broke out, or a naval war in the Pacific.
The conservatives are weak on all advertising. The shear amount of gambling adverts in the UK are abysmal. As well as direct marketing to children for high strength vapes. We nearly got rid of nicotine addiction in young people, it's was falling significantly prior to vapes being allowed to advertise to children. They don't care, they'll sell anything to the highest bidder.
including an ad-tech biz in China involved in past privacy controversies
various advertising exchanges and resellers ranging from Google (like what El Reg uses) to one in China.
Do they think google hasn't been involved in privacy controversies?
“The government” is a diverse thing look at the examples given in the article
- Transport for London
- Derbyshire Dales District Council
- Walsall Council
- The Met Office
I rather doubt Chinese banner ad brokers are at the top of Derbyshire council’s agenda
I rather doubt Chinese banner ad brokers are at the top of Derbyshire council’s agenda
We can't let them take the high ground!
Is Britain anti-China?
Yup. Same brain worms as the US.
There was concern about the influx of Chinese electric cars as it was suggested that China could remotely switch them off, creating havoc in places like London.
the government is out of money ok /s
Governments are often made up of more than one person, and the people often have thoughts and priorities that don't completely line up all in a row.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Exclusive At least 18 public-sector websites in the UK and US send visitor data in some form to various web advertising brokers – including an ad-tech biz in China involved in past privacy controversies, a security firm claims.
Silent Push's report identifies four .gov sites that, in our experience, do not display adverts though do ping web ad platforms, do list various exchanges in their ads.txt files, and may break US government CISA rules.
"So these organizations don't all immediately get JavaScript access to drop on the page but they do get payloads from the bid stream – and by default it includes sensitive fields, like the device IP address.
There are settings that publishers can toggle on to limit some of the personal data from being shared via the bid stream, but there's no indication this is on for these UK sites – especially based on the significant number of vendors that are authorized by the domains."
"The JavaScript of [tracking] pixels captures similar data that the JavaScript of real-time bidding endpoints collects, with the core difference being that pixels can set a cookie on your browser immediately, whereas in ad tech the thousands or tens of thousands of entities with opportunities to bid don't get an opportunity to put a cookie on your computer unless they win an auction – and then only through approved attribution vendors," he explained.
"We take these matters very seriously, and after looking into this in some detail with the team, we have never had any ad quality issues with Yeahmobi in the past, nor are we aware of any Chinese links, but as a precaution we are in the process of removing them from all our publisher ads.txt files until further notice.
The original article contains 1,311 words, the summary contains 290 words. Saved 78%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!