Google’s decision to allow new tracking methods has sparked criticism from privacy advocates, who argue the move prioritizes business interests over user privacy.
Starting Sunday, Google will permit “fingerprinting,” a technique that enables advertisers to collect data such as IP addresses and device details. Critics say this change makes it more difficult for users to control how their data is gathered.
Google defends the decision, stating that fingerprinting is already widely used by other companies and that it is promoting responsible data practices. In a statement to the BBC, the company said, “Privacy-enhancing technologies offer new ways for our partners to succeed on emerging platforms… without compromising on user privacy.”
However, this marks a shift from Google’s previous stance. In 2019, the company described fingerprinting as a method that “subverts user choice and is wrong.” Now, Google argues that evolving internet usage—such as smart TVs and gaming consoles—requires new approaches to ad targeting beyond traditional cookie-based tracking.
Privacy advocates warn that fingerprinting creates unique digital profiles of users, making it easier for advertisers to track individuals across the web without their explicit consent. Martin Thomson, a distinguished engineer at Mozilla, said, “By allowing fingerprinting, Google has given itself – and the advertising industry it dominates – permission to use a form of tracking that people can’t do much to stop.”
Unlike cookies, which users can manage, fingerprinting gathers various data points—such as screen size, browser type, time zone, and battery level—to form a distinct identifier. This type of tracking had previously been restricted by Google for ad targeting.
Lena Cohen, staff technologist at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, criticized the change, stating, “By explicitly allowing a tracking technique that they previously described as incompatible with user control, Google highlights its ongoing prioritisation of profits over privacy.”
Advertising industry experts acknowledge that fingerprinting marks a shift in the landscape. Pete Wallace from ad tech company GumGum said, “Fingerprinting feels like it’s taking a much more business-centric approach to the use of consumer data rather than a consumer-centric approach.”
The UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has also expressed concern. In a December blog post, its Executive Director of Regulatory Risk, Stephen Almond, wrote, “We think this change is irresponsible.” He warned that companies using fingerprinting must demonstrate compliance with UK data laws, which he described as “a high bar to meet.”
In response to the backlash, Google stated, “We continue to give users choice whether to receive personalised ads, and will work across the industry to encourage responsible data use.” The company also said it looks forward to further discussions with the ICO on the policy change.
While advertising remains a crucial part of the internet’s economic model, critics argue that Google’s move shifts the balance further away from consumer privacy and toward corporate profits.
