Skift Take
As a baseball luminary once said, “It ain’t over til it’s over.” Third-party cookies were about to be gone but then they weren’t.
When it came down to it, Google didn’t want to anger its core customers — advertisers — and this week announced it won’t phase out third-party cookies in its Chrome browser as planned.
These cookies enable companies to track and target consumers across other websites. For example, Expedia can send potential customers an ad when it sees them shopping for luggage on Amazon, or Hilton can offer discounted stays to potential customers who may have been visiting Marriott.com.
Knowingly or not, consumers often agree to enable the use of third-party cookies as trackers when they visit websites. Google’s decision to retain these ad trackers reversed a 2019 pledge to phase them out.
Apple gives users of its Safari browser the option to block third party cookies, and limits tracking capabilities. Firefox gives users the choice of how to curtail them.
In its earnings call Tuesday, Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai said its Google brand will take steps to improve users’ privacy options but won’t gut cookies. “But on third-party cookies, given the implications across the ecosystems and considerations and feedback across so many stakeholders, we now believe user choice is the best path forward there,” he said.
In addition to advertisers, some competition authorities chimed in that deleting third party cookies might limit advertising competition.
What Does Google’s Decision on Cookies Mean for Travel Marketers?
We asked a variety of people across the travel, marketing and venture capital industries what Google’s retreat on cookies means for travel marketers.
Seth Borko, Skift Head of Research
Seth Borko, head of Skift Research, said Google’s decision to retain the use of third-party cookies will help smaller travel advertisers because larger companies were already developing ways to better use their own first-party data to track consumers in the event that cookie capabilities disappeared.
“I think this change comes too late to make a difference,” Borko said. “Large companies have spent a lot of time, money, and energy investing in first-party data strategies and it’s probably too late to put that genie back in the bottle no matter what Google does or doesn’t do. First-party data is really powerful and can be used for things like training AI models and creating personalized offers and digital experiences.”
He said Google’s decision “won’t change the status quo” because the big players continue to invest in first-party data “in the hopes of gaining an AI and personalization edge.”
Brian Harniman, Vice President of Strategy at From
Brian Harniman, vice president of strategy at digital agency From, said a Google statement that it made the decision so it could enhance consumer choice in advertising and to protect privacy rights “makes me want to throw my laptop out the window.”
“I think it’s an acknowledgement that they’re beholden to their large advertisers — travel brands or otherwise,” Harniman said, referring to Google. “These folks need to continue to understand attribution, and all the third-party cookies make it easier to do that. Using them makes it easier to buy retargeted media through Google across the web as well.”
He added that perhaps the decision shows that Google’s native advertising products — such as Google Flights and Google Hotels — “are not mature enough to take up all the revenue loss if the travel advertisers revolted.”
Amber Carpenter, Senior Vice President at Vtrips
Amber Carpenter, senior vice president of product and marketing at vacation rental property manager Vtrips, doesn’t see Google’s reversal as very impactful on travel brands.
“Privacy laws requiring that consumers are given a choice about cookie tracking means that savvy teams will still need to implement a first-party solution and data modeling to get a holistic picture of consumer behavior, conversion and ROI,” Carpenter said.
Gilad Berenstein, Founder at Brook Bay Capital
Gilad Berenstein, founder of the venture capital firm Brook Bay Capital, said in the short-term Google’s decision is good for travel marketers “since most businesses in our industry are not prepared for a post-cookie future.”
However, he said he was — and is — a fan of “killing the cookie” because it would have forced companies to innovate in “finding a better way of understanding customers and marketing to them.”
Berenstein said there is a lot of “overlooked data,” including first-party data, “that clever entrepreneurs and product people will be able to decipher” and use to advantage.
Lena Cohen, Staff Technologist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation
Lena Cohen, staff technologist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, told Cnet.com “Google’s decision to continue allowing third-party cookies, despite other major browsers blocking them for years, is a direct consequence of their advertising-driven business model. With nearly 80% of Google’s revenue derived from online advertising, it’s clear why Chrome is putting advertisers’ interests above users’ privacy.”