Vizio to pay millions in FTC settlement for spying on customers

TV manufacturer Vizio and a subsidiary will pay $2.2 million to settle claims that the two companies secretly tracked consumers' viewing habits and sold the information to marketing companies, according to New Jersey officials.

Dan Steinberg/AP for LeEco
Vizio CTO Matthew McRae at LeEco and VIZIO Press Conference in Hollywood in July 2016, where it was announced that LeEco had acquired VIZIO for $2 billion.

The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) said Monday that television manufacturer Vizio is paying a total of $2.2 million to settle allegations that the company tracked consumers’ viewing habits and sold the information to advertisers and data brokers.

The Irvine, Calif.-based company, which has sold over 11 million internet-connected televisions since 2010, is required to delete all the information collected prior to March 1, 2016, in addition to obtaining consent from users in its future data collection and sharing practices.

“This settlement stops Vizio’s unauthorized tracking, and makes clear that smart TV makers should get people’s consent before collecting and sharing television viewing information,” Kevin Moriarty, an attorney for the FTC, wrote in a blog post on Monday.

The announcement of the settlement came on the same day that the FTC and the State of New Jersey filed a federal court order against Vizio. According to the complaint, Vizio and its subsidiary have allegedly been continuously collecting data on what a consumers are watching “second-by-second,” without any onscreen notice, since February 2014.  

“Defendants have stated that the ACR software captures up to 100 billion data points each day from more than 10 million Vizio televisions,” the complaint states. “Defendants store this data indefinitely.”

Vizio then sold the information to third parties for revenue. According to the plaintiffs, the users’ viewing data was used for three main purposes: analyzing the users' viewing habits, measuring the effectiveness of advertising campaigns, and pursuing targeted advertisement on the company's other digital devices.

In addition, the parallel investigations conducted by FTC and the state found that the company also shared the viewers’ demographic information, including sex, age, income, and household size. However, Vizio denied such allegations in its statement.

“The ACR program never paired viewing data with personally identifiable information such as name or contact information, and the Commission did not allege or contend otherwise,” Jerry Huang, general counsel of Vizio, said in a statement. “Instead, as the Complaint notes, the practices challenged by the government related only to the use of viewing data in the ‘aggregate’ to create summary reports measuring viewing audiences or behaviors.”

The case against Vizio was not without precedent. As The Christian Science Monitor noted in 2015:

LG came under fire in 2013 for the way it used customer data, which led to an investigation by the United Kingdom’s information commissioner’s office over whether the company was mining data without proper consent. Blogger Jason Huntly revealed LG’s smart TV was collecting consumer information including viewing history and files stored on USB drives attached to the television, even when the “Collection of watching info” setting was turned to ‘off.’”

Going forward, Vizio has said it hopes this resolution will offer some guidelines for data collecting and sharing practices in the industry.

“This resolution sets a new standard for best industry privacy practices for the collection and analysis of data collected from today’s internet-connected televisions and other home devices,” Mr. Huang said.

This report includes material from the Associated Press.

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.