

We’ll continue our deep dive into Australia’s Privacy Act Review report in this article. We plan to cover the proposed changes to Australian law relating to personal information used in marketing.
The Australian Privacy Act Review Report proposes introducing definitions for direct marketing, targeting, and trading, as follows:
Direct Marketing: “the collection, use or disclosure of personal information to communicate directly with an individual to promote advertising or marketing material.”
Targeting: “the collection, use or disclosure of information which relates to an individual including personal information, deidentified information, and unidentified information (internet history/tracking etc.) for tailoring services, content information, advertisements or offers provided to or withheld from an individual (either on their own, or as a member of some group or class).”
Trading: “the disclosure of personal information for a benefit, service or advantage.”
Beyond providing clarity in the form of new definitions, the proposed changes would provide individuals with more choice, more control, and increased rights relating to direct and targeted marketing.
The Privacy Act Review Report proposes to introduce a right for individuals to opt-out of their personal information being used or disclosed for direct marketing purposes.
The proposed changes would allow entities to collect personal information (excluding sensitive information) for direct marketing without consent. However, covered entities would need to provide individuals with the ability to opt-out.
This approach is less privacy-centric than what we’re seeing being introduced in other jurisdictions. Europe’s GDPR, as well as the privacy laws in New Zealand, Canada, India, Brasil, Japan and South Korea all introduced opt-in consent requirements. And we would argue that opt-in consents are fairer to consumers who wish to exercise their right to privacy.
The Privacy Act Review Report also proposes to introduce a right for individuals to opt out of targeted advertising.
The report notes that it should be relatively easy for individuals to make this choice and several ‘dark patterns’ are cited as being design features organisations should avoid when implementing opt-outs, specifically entities should not:
Again, we found the report’s proposal to introduce an opt-out (not opt-in) framework a little perplexing. The report cites pages of potential drawbacks of targeted advertising, including a significant majority of consumers being uncomfortable with it, alongside the potential for social harm, the negative impact on individual rights, harm to vulnerable people, and the risk to the democratic process. In contrast, the report cited economic benefit in support of targeted marketing. In our opinion, those significant drawbacks present a strong case for consumers to opt-in to targeted advertising.
The Privacy Act Review Report also proposed changes relating to trading in personal information. It suggests introducing a requirement that individuals provide consent before entities can trade their personal information.
The consent must be voluntary, informed, current, specific and unambiguous. This would require organisations to transparently and clearly disclose details about where information is traded, as well as what information is being traded.
The report also proposed to prohibit direct marketing to a child other than if the personal information collected:
Similar prohibitions were proposed to prohibit targeted advertising to children and trading in the personal information of children.
The final piece of the puzzle we’ll cover in this article is the proposed changes to the definitions and use of data analytics in Australia’s privacy law reform proposal.
The report suggests updating the definition of ‘collect’ to make it clear that inferred information can be (and is) collected. This includes information collected (or inferred) through data analytics or a machine-learning process.
Then, the report raised the value of limiting the use of data analytics in the context of voting. Specifically, it reflected on the use of a ‘fair and reasonable’ test to determine whether data analytics should be used to engage with voters.
While these are proposals now, it may be a good idea to start planning to comply with these changes since some of the changes can take time to implement.
Here are some things you can do:
If your organisation needs assistance developing a ‘plan of attack’ to respond to Australia’s changing privacy laws, reach out. Our privacy team would love to assist.
"*" indicates required fields
"*" indicates required fields
Privacy 108 collects your name and email to send you our newsletter. If you do not provide this information, we will be unable to send it to you. We may use third-party service providers (such as email marketing platforms) to distribute our communications. Some providers may store information overseas, including in the United States. For more information about how we handle your personal information, including how to access or correct it or make a complaint, please see our Privacy Policy or contact us at hello@privacy108.com.au. You can unsubscribe at any time using the link in our emails or by contacting hello@privacy108.com.au.