For event agencies, marketing/HR and the public sector

US data vacuum cleaners on websites should have the plug pulled



Reading progress

How authorities can become data stealers

Data vacuum cleaner on government websites

Recently, we have been providing more information about the very questionable practice of using YouTube, Facebook and Co. as playout platforms for livestreams and videos.
If profit-oriented companies participating in economic life do this, it is their free decision. It's their own fault, because at some point they will realize that they are marketing kamikazes. Find out why here:

It is different for a public authority. The taxpayer finances the state and has a right to exemplary application of the law. This also includes visiting a government website. What happens when you visit a site with integrated services such as videos or livestreams? Let's switch to the real world:

Imagine visiting your tax office and being completely scanned at the gate, with all your data recorded and stored. A camera records your general condition, your clothing and your voice. The algorithm determines, among other things, that you could use new shoes and glasses, and the tax office sells this information to the most bidding companies for this information. This deal is garnished with the information about your net income, so that the bidders can also make you the offer corresponding to your wallet.


And almost every time a website with embedded services like Youtube or Vimeo videos is accessed (you don't even have to start the player), the US corporations receive the IP address of the user every time.

And with this IP address can be assigned:
  • Rough location
  • Detailed location
  • Contact information
  • physical address
  • E-mail address
  • Name
  • Phone number
  • Search history
  • Browsing history
  • Identifiers
  • User ID
  • Device ID
  • Usage data
  • Product interaction
  • Advertising data

No data to tax-avoiding big tech corporations

Even if users agree to data sharing, they do not realize that each time they do so, the digital usage profile of their person is refined, which increases the value of this data set enormously. The data is stored forever and monetized on an ongoing basis. Youtube could thus generate around $21 billion in 2021.

Cookie banner - the great deception

If the visitors reject a data transfer via cookie banner, the IP address was already transmitted before. A refusal comes too late. The cookie banner is useless, on the contrary, it pretends legal certainty where there is none....

No data to tax-avoiding big tech corporations

As a market participant in the EU, I must note that here the pockets of Alphabet & Co. are continuously filled, and personal of the audience such as the political interest of people are passed on to these corporations, which are not charities, but business enterprises.

Streaming is only free because the data is used to "pay" for it, leaving a profit that is also minimally taxed in a low-tax country in the EU rather than in Germany. (Tax saving model via Ireland, NL - keyword "DoubleDutchIrishSandwich").
Also of concern is that U.S. companies, and thus intelligence agencies, gain access to information such as political interests of these users.
(The ECJ, in its "privacy shield" agreement, classified the U.S. as an unsafe third country because security agencies could readily

can view data records of EU citizens). Here, political orientation is certainly one of the more sensitive aspects of the personality profile.

After all, anyone who frequently watches videos related to party X also seems to lean toward party X politically. Facebook can sell this data to party Y or Z at any time. An authority would then have helped classify the German electorate. Does the secrecy of the ballot no longer apply? Can and may that be?

Data from children and young people as bycatch

And then there's the digital data byproduct: Even the data of children and young people under the age of 16, who are not allowed to consent to the transfer of data due to their lack of legal capacity, are readily taken, stored and processed. This is certainly a violation of the GDPR, which must be observed by authorities. However, they are exempt from penalties of up to 4% of turnover. Not having to pay, however, does not mean having to abet this unspeakable practice of rampant data theft. US providers have no business on government websites.

My conclusion:

I strongly recommend switching to Video.Taxi. The data remains the property of our customers, we do not resell or otherwise monetize user data.