Advertise on podcast: The Monopoly Report

Is Apple's Safari browser becoming another gatekeeper for the open web? Host Alan Chapell sits down with Gene Burrus, competition and regulatory attorney and Global Policy Counsel for the Coalition for App Fairness. Gene and Alan discuss Apple’s App Tracking Transparency framework and the European competition response, the Safari domain block list, Google’s conspicuous absence from Apple’s block list, the role of interoperability as a key component of the growth of the web, and the risk of Apple’s actions leading to a splinternet. They also share a few of the (albeit limited) choices available to the adtech community. The Chapell Regulatory Insider can be found at: https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Gene Burrus may be found at https://burruscompstrategies.com/about Takeaways Apple's reported Safari domain blocking raises concerns about browser neutrality, competition, and transparency. Apple's App Tracking Transparency framework faces scrutiny over its potential impact on competing ad tech businesses. Apple's relationship with Google raises questions about consistent enforcement of browser privacy restrictions. Independent ad tech companies face significant legal and financial barriers when challenging powerful platforms. Industry collaboration and interoperable standards could help protect competition and the open web. Chapters 00:29 Introduction to Apple's Safari Blocking Controversy03:30 Coalition for App Fairness and Mobile Gatekeepers06:37 Why Companies Hesitate to Challenge Apple and Google09:39 App Tracking Transparency and EU Antitrust Scrutiny12:20 Safari's Reported Blocking of Ad Tech Domains14:24 Apple, Google, and Competition Concerns16:00 Why Browser Interoperability Matters20:22 Legal Options for Independent Ad Tech Companies24:01 European Class Actions and Regulatory Challenges27:16 Advocacy for Browser Competition32:16 Big Tech's Influence on Innovation34:28 The Risk of a Fragmented Internet38:52 Closing Thoughts with Gene Burrus39:22 Alan Chapell's Analysis of Browser Gatekeeping42:29 Why Independent Ad Tech Needs Collective Action43:22 Potential Solutions for the Ad Tech Industry44:51 Final Takeaways and Outro Guests: Alan Chapell Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Keith Petry, SVP of Data and Identity at Viant, and Scott Messer of Messer Media and host of Ad Tech Therapy join Alan Chapell. They explore Google’s ad tech remedies, publisher economics, industry standards, AI’s impact on content, third-party cookies, measurement, and why stronger collective action may be critical to the future of the open web. The Chapell Regulatory Insider can be found at: https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Takeaways - Industry standards only matter when buyers actively adopt them. - Premium publisher inventory needs clearer economic recognition. - Publishers need to rethink how they create, distribute, and monetize IP. - AI is increasing pressure on publishers to protect original content. - Google’s ad tech remedies could create more vendor choice, but change may be gradual. - Third-party cookies and identity remain important to measurement and the open web.  Chapters: 00:29 Welcome to The Monopoly Report 01:13 Google, Publishing, Privacy and Identity 02:12 Keith Petry, SVP of Data and Identity at Viant 03:07 What Google’s Ad Tech Remedies Could Mean 04:11 What the Industry Needs From Trade Associations 06:12 Standards, Agentic Buying and Business Outcomes 07:02 The Future of Publisher Economics 09:20 Viant and the Future of Third-Party Cookies 10:58 Scott Messer on Publishers, AI and Ad Tech 11:40 What Gives Publishers Hope 12:31 Rethinking What It Means to Be a Publisher 14:03 Google’s Ad Tech Remedies and Publisher Choice 15:01 Why Trade Groups Need Stronger Collective Action 17:43 Content Marketplaces and AI Licensing 19:44 Protecting Publishers From AI Content Extraction 20:12 Google Search, Licensing and Model Dehydration 21:47 Why Publishers Need Coordinated Action 23:04 Will Third-Party Cookies Survive? 25:19 Apple ATT and the Future of Measurement 27:08 Key Lessons for Ad Tech and Publishers Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Alan Chapell speaks with Dr. Johnny Ryan, Director of ENFORCE at the Irish Council for Civil Liberties, about GDPR enforcement, real-time bidding, purpose limitation, publisher economics, and the growing power of major technology platforms. Johnny is a long-time critic of programmatic advertising - having characterized real-time bidding as “The biggest data breach in history.” Chapell and Ryan explore whether privacy-friendly advertising can support publishers, the costs of fraud and ad tech intermediaries, and what Europe’s regulatory approach means for the future of digital advertising. The Chapell Regulatory Insider can be found at: https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Takeaways: Weak enforcement has limited GDPR’s practical impact on the digital advertising industry. Purpose limitation and data minimization could reduce privacy risks while still supporting advertising. Reducing behavioral tracking may help publishers limit fraud and unnecessary ad tech costs. Greater transparency is needed around digital advertising measurement and platform data practices. Europe’s digital sovereignty depends partly on stronger enforcement, competition policy, and alternatives to dominant technology platforms. Chapters:00:00 Introduction: GDPR, Privacy and Ad Tech03:10 Dr. Johnny Ryan’s Journey Into Privacy and Ad Tech06:03 GDPR and Europe’s Enforcement Problem11:42 Consent and the European Privacy Framework13:42 Can Advertising Work With Less Personal Data?17:30 Publisher Economics and Contextual Advertising21:09 The Challenge of ID-Less Advertising23:31 Advertisers, Measurement and Ad Tech Transparency27:11 Purpose Limitation and Platform Power36:35 Data Ownership, Privacy and Competition40:07 Europe’s Digital Sovereignty and Big Tech46:04 What Should Ad Tech Companies Do Next?48:30 Tracking, Fraud and Publisher Revenue53:33 Lessons From Dr. Ryan’s Career55:07 Alan’s Key Takeaways and Closing Analysis Guests: Alan Chapell Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Claire Stapleton joins Alan Chapell to discuss her years inside Google, from shaping the company’s internal communications to helping organize the 2018 Google walkout. They explore the following from multiple perspectives: Google’s “Don’t Be Evil” philosophy, employee activism, corporate messaging, the limits of worker dissent, and what Claire calls “PR jujitsu” and what Alan characterizes as “Regulatory jujitsu.” Alan and Claire compare notes as between Google’s approach to addressing internal consent, to the company’s approach to managing dissent within the broader digital media industry and within standards bodies. Drawing heavily from Claire’s book Don't Be Evil: Bad Bosses, Fake Promises, and My Escape from Big Tech.the conversation also examines how money, power, and institutional influence can reshape corporate values, plus why employees should build an identity and sense of purpose beyond their jobs. Don’t Be Evil by Claire Stapleton can be purchased at https://tinyurl.com/5n7kkhv3.Yield by Ari Paparo can be purchased at https://tinyurl.com/msfdwrry. The Chapell Regulatory Insider can be found at: https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Takeaways: Google’s early culture built a powerful internal story around openness, innovation, and doing good. The 2018 Google walkout exposed the limits of employee voice and internal dissent. “PR jujitsu” can acknowledge criticism without committing to meaningful change. Vague principles like “Don’t Be Evil” leave significant room for companies to define their own standards. Power and wealth can insulate executives from ordinary feedback and criticism. Employees should avoid making their corporate identity their entire source of self-worth and purpose. Chapters:00:29 Welcome and Introduction00:53 Meet Claire Stapleton01:11 The 2018 Google Walkout04:49 Claire’s Early Years at Google08:09 When Google’s Story Started to Crack10:08 The Road to Employee Activism16:06 Google’s Strategy, Power and Privacy18:19 Article 13 and the Limits of Employee Voice25:32 What “Don’t Be Evil” Really Meant30:03 When Google’s Culture Began to Change32:38 Google’s “PR Jujitsu” Playbook35:18 Alan’s Experience With Google’s Influence40:33 Money, Power and Executive Insulation44:48 Claire’s Advice to Her Younger Self50:22 Alan’s Key Takeaways55:01 Closing Guests: Alan Chapell Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Marc Guldimann, founder and CEO of Adelaide, joins Alan Chapell to discuss why attribution may be solving the wrong problem, how AU measures media quality, and whether attention can become a true currency for digital advertising. The Chapell Regulatory Insider can be found at: https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Takeaways Attribution may be a symptom of poor media-quality signals. AU measures the probability of attention and outcomes. Adelaide wants AU to become a shared media-quality currency. Publisher audits could reduce reliance on impression-level tracking. AI-driven media buying will need reliable quality signals. Shared quality standards could reshape how digital media is bought and priced. Chapters00:00 Marc Guldimann’s Background05:45 Why Viewability Gets Gamed07:54 The Problem With Attention Duration10:50 Can AU Replace Viewability?15:06 How Adelaide Builds AU20:13 Adelaide’s Publisher Strategy23:35 AI Agents & Media Quality27:37 Browsers, Privacy & Tracking31:55 Are Outcomes the Real Currency?34:41 Private vs. Shared Measurement38:16 Closing Guests: Alan Chapell Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Thirteen months of Google's search data is worth roughly seventeen years of Bing's. That single number explains why Google's search business is now under pressure from four directions at once—the DOJ's antitrust remedy, the EU's Digital Markets Act, the UK's CMA, and the proposed US SEARCH Act. Now that Google is required to share its search data with competitors, the question turns to whether such sharing can be done in a way that is privacy safe. Do PETs offer a solution? Is this simply a place where privacy interests and competition interests are perpetually at odds? Is this simply another opportunity for Google to delay? Alan Chapell sits down with Alissa Cooper of the KGI to discuss the DOJ search remedies, the EU Digital Markets Act, privacy, AI, and what search data sharing could mean for competition and innovation Alissa Cooper’s bio can be found at: https://kgi.georgetown.edu/people/alissa-cooper/  The Chapell Regulatory Insider can be found at: https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Takeaways Why regulators want Google to share search data Privacy vs. competition in search How AI is changing the data-sharing debate Why independent oversight is essential Chapters 00:00 Introduction 03:24 Why Google Must Share Search Data 08:35 Comparing Global Regulations 16:06 What Search Data Includes 19:34 Privacy Concerns 32:20 Independent Oversight 43:00 Final Takeaways 50:05 Closing Remarks Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Is self-regulation still relevant in today's privacy-first advertising landscape? Alan Chapell sits down with Andy Dale, General Counsel and Chief Privacy Officer at OpenAP, to discuss the future of industry self-regulation, AI governance, privacy laws, and what ad tech organizations must do to remain valuable as regulation evolves. The Chapell Regulatory Insider may be found at https://chapellreport.substack.com/ The Data Protection Breakfast Club podcast may be found at https://rephonic.com/podcasts/data-protection-breakfast-club Takeaways: - Why self-regulation in ad tech needs to evolve beyond traditional compliance. - How AI governance, privacy laws, and managed services are reshaping the industry. - The future role of trade associations in supporting advertisers and ad tech companies. - Why collaboration and practical guidance may matter more than ever. Chapters: 00:00 Introduction 00:34 Meet Andy Dale, General Counsel & Chief Privacy Officer at OpenAP 02:54 Is self-regulation still relevant? 06:08 Why now is the time to rethink industry organizations 07:36 Privacy laws vs. self-regulation 10:18 What advertisers need today 13:12 The future of industry collaboration 19:17 The three pillars: Advocacy, Standards & Compliance 22:11 How best practices should evolve 28:50 Managed services and privacy support 32:04 AI governance and the next opportunity 33:18 Does the DAA still matter? 37:25 Industry partnerships and consolidation 44:20 The future value of trade associations 46:03 Final thoughts Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Alan Chapell speaks with Martin Thomson, Distinguished Engineer at Mozilla, about the W3C Attribution API, browser-based measurement, privacy-enhancing technologies, interoperability, fraud, and the future of advertising attribution. They examine the tradeoffs between privacy, competition, and ad measurement. The Attribution API spec may be found here: https://github.com/w3c/attributionThe Chapell Regulatory Insider may be found here: https://chapellreport.substack.com/A Written Q&A between Alan and Martin may be found here: https://monopoly-report.com/p/the-w3c-attribution-api Takeaways Mozilla explains the goals behind the W3C Attribution API and browser-based measurement. The discussion explores privacy, interoperability, and the future of digital advertising. Martin Thomson addresses concerns around attribution accuracy, fraud, and competition. The episode examines what remains after Google's Privacy Sandbox initiative. Alan Chapell and Martin Thomson debate how future web standards could reshape ad measurement. Chapters00:00 Introduction01:26 Meet Martin Thomson of Mozilla06:04 What is the W3C Attribution API?10:57 Transparency and trust in browser measurement14:32 Privacy Sandbox and what remains16:07 Differential privacy explained18:37 Interoperability vs. user privacy23:27 Attribution, incrementality, and measurement challenges27:35 The future of measurement partners31:56 Fraud, attribution, and Google's role37:20 Designing standards for the future web41:20 Alan Chapell's key takeaways and analysis45:54 Closing remarks Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Alan Chapell sits down with Cindy Cohn, former Executive Director of the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) and author of Privacy’s Defender. They discuss the landmark Bernstein encryption case, the Snowden revelations, surveillance, behavioral advertising, privacy regulation, competition law, some lessons for companies in the ads space, and the future of digital rights in an increasingly monitored world.  Privacy’s Defender is available at: https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262051248/privacys-defender/ Can Privacy Technologies Replace Cookies? Ad Revenue in a Field Experiment is available at: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5284526  The Chapell Regulatory Insider is available at: https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Takeaways Cindy Cohn reflects on her role in the landmark Bernstein case that helped establish encryption as protected speech. The conversation explores how the Snowden disclosures exposed mass government surveillance and reshaped privacy debates. Privacy, competition, copyright, and technology policy are deeply interconnected and require a multi-pronged approach. Both guests agree that many privacy regulations unintentionally burden smaller companies while reinforcing Big Tech dominance. Behavioral advertising, surveillance pricing, and data-driven discrimination pose growing risks to consumers. Cohn argues that privacy rights must be continuously defended and that the next generation has a critical role to play. Chapters 00:00 Introduction to Cindy Cohn and Privacy’s Defender 03:57 The Bernstein Case and the Fight for Encryption Rights 06:10 Human Rights Law as a Foundation for Privacy Advocacy 08:23 How an Early Court Victory Shaped a Career 13:22 The NSA, AT&T, and the Snowden Revelations 20:46 Centralized Power, Internet Architecture, and Digital Freedom 25:07 Privacy Regulation, the FCC, and the FTC Debate 29:19 Private Rights of Action and Privacy Enforcement 31:54 Behavioral Advertising vs. Contextual Advertising 35:20 Surveillance Pricing and Consumer Fairness 39:33 Competition Law, Big Tech, and Regulatory Capture 41:10 Why Privacy Is a Team Sport 45:02 Music, Community, and Avoiding Burnout 48:26 Key Lessons from the Conversation 53:08 Surveillance Pricing, AI, and Future Risks 54:06 The Growing Number of Privacy Choke Points 55:11 Final Thoughts and Book Recommendation Guests: Alan Chapell Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

At the NAI Summit 2026, Tony Ficarrotta, VP and General Counsel of the NAI, sat down with Tom Kemp, Executive Director of CalPrivacy, for an in-depth discussion on the California Delete Act, the DROP platform, data broker regulation, opt-out preference signals, privacy enforcement, and the future of federal privacy legislation. They explore how California is making privacy rights easier to exercise for consumers, the challenges of balancing innovation with consumer protection, and what businesses should expect from the next wave of privacy regulation. More info on the NAI at https://thenai.org/ More info on CalPrivacy at https://privacy.ca.gov/about-us/ More info on the Chapell Regulatory Insider at https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Takeaways Former Silicon Valley entrepreneur and cybersecurity founder Tom Kemp now leads CalPrivacy as Executive Director. CalPrivacy aims to make privacy rights easier to exercise for consumers through tools like DROP and browser-based opt-out signals. California is developing a centralized system for consumers to request data deletion from registered brokers. The agency handles enforcement, rulemaking, audits, education, advocacy, and the data broker registry. Kemp opposes federal laws that could override stronger state privacy protections. California is expanding browser-based privacy controls while prioritizing consumer intent. Key focuses include audits, consumer education, streamlined compliance, and alignment with other state privacy laws. Chapters00:00 Introduction & Special NAI Summit Interview01:38 Meet Tom Kemp: From Entrepreneur to CalPrivacy Director08:49 Why Tom Kemp Wrote His Book on Big Tech & Privacy14:01 Why Privacy Matters and the Risks of Personal Data Misuse18:32 What Makes CalPrivacy Different From Other Regulators?24:30 California Privacy Legislation and Current Policy Priorities29:22 AB 1542 and the Debate Over Sensitive Data Sales36:38 Expanding the Delete Act Beyond California40:28 Federal Privacy Law and the Secure Data Act Debate46:39 Opt-Out Preference Signals and Consumer Choice at Scale57:03 Privacy Regulation, Competition, and Browser Influence01:02:08 The Future of California Privacy Regulation01:04:23 Building CalPrivacy’s Next Chapter01:07:54 Closing Remarks & Preview of Next Episode Guests: Alan Chapell Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Alan Chapell sits down with journalist, entrepreneur, and Wired co-founder John Battelle for a deep discussion on AI, privacy, data ownership, publishing, and the future of the internet. They unpack the “inner monologue bloom,” OpenAI’s ambitious ad revenue projections, the economics behind content creation in the AI age, and why Battelle believes data portability could unlock an entirely new innovation economy. From programmatic advertising to platform control, this conversation explores who will ultimately control the next era of digital infrastructure. You may find John at https://battellemedia.com/ or https://www.linkedin.com/in/johnbattelle/. You may find the Chapell Regulatory Insider at https://chapellreport.substack.com/. Takeaways - AI chatbots are creating a new “inner monologue” data economy. - Data is non-rivalrous, but tech platforms treat it like a closed asset. - OpenAI’s $100B ad revenue target would require massive market disruption. - Publishers still lack a scalable AI monetization model. -Programmatic ad tech may be one of the most underutilized infrastructures online. - Battelle argues consumers should own portable, machine-readable versions of their data. - AI agents could reshape commerce, search and personalization. - Platform control battles are shifting from browsers to AI ecosystems. - Local journalism faces a growing sustainability crisis in the AI era. - The next phase of the internet may depend on user-controlled AI agents. Chapters 00:00 Alan introduces John Battelle and his background in tech and media. 03:00 The “inner monologue bloom” and AI-driven privacy concerns. 09:20 Why data is treated incorrectly as a rivalrous asset. 15:00 OpenAI’s $100B advertising ambition and whether it’s realistic. 19:30 The future of AI agents and user-controlled personal data. 27:15 Apple, platform gatekeeping and the fight for user agency. 35:00 The economics of AI infrastructure and compute costs. 39:55 How AI impacts publishers, local journalism and content monetization. 50:55 Retail media, first-party data and the future of advertising. 58:00 Journalism as a public good and the risks of centralized AI control. 01:01:00 Why programmatic ad tech remains massively underestimated. 01:11:30 Battelle’s proposed “Token Act” and machine-readable data portability. 01:16:45 Final thoughts and where to follow John Battelle. Guests: Alan Chapell Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

JP Schmetz, Chief of Search and Ads at Brave, joins Alan Chapell to debate the questions that most browser executives won't touch on the record. Should publishers stop outsourcing ad sales to Meta and Google? Is "first-party vs. third-party" a meaningful distinction to users — or a convenient line Brave draws to justify default blocking? Alan pushes back. JP pushes back harder. Featuring references to Jason Kint at DCN, GPC defaults, The Knight-Georgetown Institute (KGI) report covering data sharing pursuant to the DOJ Search remedies (among other items), and why rooting against the AI investment cycle is, by default, rooting for Google to win everything again. The KGI Report on data sharing is available at https://kgi.georgetown.edu/wp-content/uploads/2026/04/Designing_the_Technical_Committee_Report_KGI-FINAL-April-2026.pdf. Sumit Sharma’s Report on Data Sharing is available at https://insights.sumitsharma.consulting/p/google-search-remedies-implementation The Chapell Regulatory Insider is available at https://chapellreport.substack.com/  Takeaways - Brave believes browsers should prioritize users over advertisers. - JP argues Google’s monopoly power comes from distribution and monetization. - Brave blocks third-party requests by default for privacy reasons. - Alan and JP debate the merits of blocking ads in the name of privacy. - Brave Search now powers parts of the AI search ecosystem. - AI could redistribute traffic away from traditional search engines. - JP believes publishers became too dependent on programmatic ad tech. - Subscription-based AI models may create a healthier internet economy. Chapters 00:00 Introduction and meeting JP Schmetz 00:36 Can browsers still serve users first? 04:05 Why browsers need search revenue to survive 05:49 The economics of search advertising 08:10 DOJ remedies, Chrome, and Google dominance 10:39 Brave’s evolution from privacy browser to search business 12:47 Why Brave blocks third-party ads and trackers 16:18 Publishers, ad tech, and selling ads directly 19:18 Ad tech circumvention and browser controls 22:02 Is Brave hurting publisher monetization? 25:05 Contextual advertising vs third-party tracking 28:47 Global Privacy Control and browser defaults 32:36 Brave Search, Google defaults, and monetization 34:56 Google data sharing and search competition 41:15 AI, search, and the future of the internet 46:30 Subscription models vs ad-funded AI 49:43 Why competition against Google still matters 51:25 Final thoughts and closing remarks Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Don Marti joins Alan Chapell to unpack the hidden risks behind the push for industry standards for “privacy-safe”  ad attribution, the myth of privacy-preserving tech, and how big platforms may be reshaping the future of digital advertising. The Chapell Regulatory Insider is at https://chapellreport.substack.com/ Don Marti may be found at: https://aloodo.com/  See Don Marti’s recent AdExchanger piece at https://www.adexchanger.com/data-driven-thinking/what-happens-when-the-attribution-cartel-meets-advertisings-halo-effect/   Additional discussion re: the problems with PETs for advertising https://privacy-daily.com/news/2025/06/10/PrivacyEnhancing-Technologies-Are-Not-a-Silver-Bullet-PEPR-Told-2506100010 https://rjionline.org/news/the-traffic-and-revenue-crisis-for-news-is-a-symptom-of-big-techs-economy-wide-trust-collapse/  https://rjionline.org/news/big-tech-is-squeezing-advertising-jobs-and-companies/  https://rjionline.org/news/big-techs-economic-takeover-can-be-beat/  https://rjionline.org/news/big-tech-runs-counter-to-journalism-values-so-why-is-the-news-industry-helping-tech-take-over/  Takeaways Privacy-focused users are often the most valuable customers, challenging traditional ad tech assumptions about measurability. Attribution is fundamentally about linking ad exposure to outcomes, but current models often prioritize simplicity over accuracy. “Privacy-preserving” systems frequently focus on mathematical guarantees that don’t align with real-world privacy harms like discrimination or deception. Proposed attribution standards may unintentionally increase surveillance incentives by enabling fraud and data laundering. Fraud in attribution systems can reward actors who intercept users right before purchase, distorting true performance signals. Big tech companies may benefit from attribution systems that reinforce their own ad recommendations, reducing competition. The “halo effect” shows ads perform better in trusted, premium environments, but current systems undervalue this dynamic. A shift toward cheap, commoditized ad placements weakens both brand equity and publisher sustainability. The so-called “attribution cartel” is defined by systems that avoid user consent and bypass opt-out mechanisms. Effective privacy regulation should focus on real-world harms rather than technical implementation details. Chapters 00:00 Intro & What Don Marti Has Been Working On 01:18 The “Marti Paradox” 02:52 What Attribution Really Means 03:35 The Broken State of Attribution Today 07:32 Complexity, Perception & Industry Behavior 08:21 The Problem with “Privacy-Preserving” Tech 11:54 Big Tech Incentives & Centralization 16:17 The Halo Effect & Ad Effectiveness 17:01 Commodification vs Sustainable Advertising 21:28 Attribution Fraud Explained 23:49 Data Laundering Through Attribution Systems 26:09 The “Attribution Cartel” Defined 29:17 W3C, Standards & Industry Power Dynamics 32:29 Alternative Approaches (AdMap) 37:03 What Good Privacy Regulation Looks Like 40:56 The Future of Attribution 43:20 What Industry Stakeholders Can Do 45:00 Rethinking Privacy Harms Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Andrew Woods, GC of SSP Pubmatic, joins Alan Chapell to discuss Pubmatic’s approach to agentic ads — and how AI has irrevocably changed the legal profession. Pubmatic’s recent agentic test campaign results were a hit at Marketecture Live, and Andrew goes deep into what he believes will need to happen in order for agentic to live up to its promise. The Chapell Regulatory Insider is available at https://chapellreport.substack.com/.  Takeaways Agentic AI does not create new liability; it accelerates existing frameworks Accountability sits with whoever deploys the agent Logging and decision provenance will be critical for compliance Privacy compliance is less about difficulty, more about fragmentation Hope is not a plan when it comes to regulatory scrutiny Data minimization is becoming a real engineering constraint AI will eliminate routine legal work but elevate strategic problem-solving Agentic systems can become powerful compliance tools if built correctly Chapters 00:10 Introduction to the episode and Andrew Woods 02:01 Andrew’s background and journey into ad tech 04:20 Lessons from Twitter on privacy and user safety 06:29 What a General Counsel does in modern ad tech 08:43 Biggest lesson from global privacy enforcement 11:04 Building trust between legal and business teams 13:21 Who is liable in agentic AI advertising 16:29 Why logging and data provenance matter 18:27 The role of compliance signals and guardrails 20:57 Why agentic compliance frameworks are not built yet 22:57 Regulation versus fragmentation challenges 24:55 How PubMatic approaches privacy by design 27:10 Data minimization in practice 28:16 Non-negotiables for agentic compliance frameworks 31:57 Where industry discussions are happening 33:50 The future of agentic AI in advertising 36:42 How PubMatic’s legal team uses AI today 40:26 Why traditional legal work is disappearing 45:09 Final thoughts and closing Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The Monopoly Report’s Alan Chapell sits down with FTC Commissioner Mark Meador at Marketecture Live to discuss industry privacy self-regulation, the future of the cookie opt-outs, the use of privacy as an anticompetitive pretext, and some ideas for better protecting kids online. Takeaways Self-regulation still matters, but must be effective and avoid collusion risks. Privacy and competition often exist in tension and require balance. Cookie-based systems are imperfect and depend on better alternatives emerging. Risks around using privacy as a pretext to lock up the browser market or access to critical data. Transparency is key for both consumer protection and fair competition. Age verification is advancing rapidly with privacy-conscious innovation. “Free” platforms still involve economic transactions and consumer trade-offs. Antitrust enforcement is shifting toward tackling dominant players’ conduct. Chapters 00:00 Introduction and role of self-regulation in advertising 00:41 Why self-regulation still matters and how it should work 02:27 What makes self-reg effective in the eyes of the FTC 04:12 The limitations of cookie-based privacy tools 06:03 Global privacy controls and market-driven solutions 08:38 Balancing privacy and competition in digital markets 10:33 Protecting children online and age verification innovation 14:29 Solving privacy concerns in age verification systems 15:38 Why universal identity checks are not the goal 18:06 Measuring harm in “free” digital platforms 20:25 Current state of antitrust enforcement 23:07 Addressing monopolies after consolidation has occurred 25:28 Rethinking antitrust and the risks of concentrated power Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices