There is a battle brewing between the Federal Trade Commission and digital advertisers over a system designed to help people control their data called "Do Not Track." On the one hand, you have the FTC saying this:

An effective Do Not Track system should go beyond simply opting consumers out of receiving targeted advertisements; it should opt them out of collection of behavioral data for all purposes other than those that would be consistent with the context of the interaction.

That seems like a pretty airtight definition. Do Not Track means, "Do not collect information about me unless it's needed to show me content that I want to see." That makes sense, no?

Well, it doesn't make sense to the online ad industry as represented by the members of the Digital Advertising Alliance. They define 'Do Not Track' as something closer to "Do Not Target." That is to say, the industry's companies want to continue to collect data even after you've said, "Do not track me." Their only concession is that they won't show you ads that have been constructed with your data in mind. Here's the summary of their position in the New York Times:

The advertising group, however, defines it as forbidding the serving of targeted ads to individuals but not prohibiting the collection of data.

One member of the group, adopting language the advertisers have stuck with for months, told the Times that defining 'Do Not Track' as prohibiting data collection "was like moving the goal posts." Ok. But what if that move sets the posts where they should be?