A translation of the open letter from advertising companies to Apple:

September 14, 2017

We're just now realizing what this means.

An Open Letter from the Digital Advertising Community

"Community" means we're down to earth and neighborly.

The undersigned organizations are leading trade associations
for the digital advertising and marketing industries,
collectively representing thousands of companies that
responsibly participate in and shape today’s digital
landscape for the millions of consumers they serve.

We sell ads. Lots of ads. So much money. We're "responsible" for certain definitions of responsible. Like your teenager is "responsible" for crashing your new Porsche into a ravine. Speaking of Porsches, have we mentioned how much money we make selling ads?

We are deeply concerned about the Safari 11 browser update
that Apple plans to release, as it overrides and replaces
existing user-controlled cookie preferences with Apple’s own
set of opaque and arbitrary standards for cookie handling.

That 99% of users think a cookie is a type of desert is neither here nor there. And by "user-controlled", we mean "defaults that benefit us".

We're also annoyed they didn't ask us. We're a bit hit at parties.

Safari’s new “Intelligent Tracking Prevention” would change
the rules by which cookies are set and recognized by
browsers. In addition to blocking all third-party cookies
(i.e. those set by a domain other than the one being
visited), as the current version of Safari does, this new
functionality would create a set of haphazard rules over the
use of first-party cookies (i.e. those set by a domain the
user has chosen to visit) that block their functionality or
purge them from users’ browsers without notice or choice.

"Haphazard" meaning "we disagree". Also, we 100% agree with user notice or choice, unless the user chooses to block ads or desires notice on how we're using their data. That's, uh... proprietary.

The infrastructure of the modern Internet depends on
consistent and generally applicable standards for cookies,
so digital companies can innovate to build content,
services, and advertising that are personalized for users
and remember their visits. Apple’s Safari move breaks those
standards and replaces them with an amorphous set of
shifting rules that will hurt the user experience and
sabotage the economic model for the Internet.

Can we talk about innovative advertising for a minute? We're piloting this pop-up that completely replaces boring content and downloads an awesome new app automatically. That app then opens with videos on housewife inventions.

We've put a lot of hard work into sandwiching ourselves as the economic model for the internet, and it really grinds our gears that anyone would suggest there are other ways to make money besides working with us.

Apple’s unilateral and heavy-handed approach is bad for
consumer choice and bad for the ad-supported online content
and services consumers love. Blocking cookies in this manner
will drive a wedge between brands and their customers, and
it will make advertising more generic and less timely and
useful. Put simply, machine-driven cookie choices do not
represent user choice; they represent browser-manufacturer
choice. As organizations devoted to innovation and growth in
the consumer economy, we will actively oppose any actions
like this by companies that harm consumers by distorting the
digital advertising ecosystem and undermining its
operations.

For example, how will users know which #brand to choose without advertising? How will our customers survive without us? Might as well shut down this whole internet thing.

We strongly encourage Apple to rethink its plan to impose
its own cookie standards and risk disrupting the valuable
digital advertising ecosystem that funds much of today’s
digital content and services.

It's not like Apple's ever forged ahead with risky new business models or economic decisions before, and open letters are really effective, so we're confident this will work.

Signed,

A whole bunch of acronyms.