Tip-Toeing Around Recall Notifications In A Privacy-Wary World

Written by Fred J. Aun
December 9th, 2009

Beyond the ever-present convenience advantage, Mobile Commerce execs struggle to find reasons for consumers to actually make purchases from their phones, rather than merely research such purchases. One new iPhone shopping list app makes a valiant attempt by flagging government recalls associated with the intended purchase. Such data would typically not be known to that consumer if the purchase had instead been consummated on a Web site or in the physical store.

Still, the Shopper app, published by ReachEverywhere, suffers a variety of odd restrictions, such as limiting the recall data to two food-oriented agencies—the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the U.S.. Department of Agriculture (USDA)—while excluding recall-friendly agencies that would impact far more products, such as the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). It also only flags recall problems when the purchase is being made. So a customer who buys a product that gets recalled an hour after the purchase is completed will, by design, not be notified. (In theory, historical notification might have been an even more compelling feature.)

The vendor said adding other recall notifications is definitely planned for unspecified future versions. “Plans are to eventually have more agency input. But as the app works now, it is mainly geared toward food/consumables, so we stuck with those ratings,” said Adam Smith of ReachEverywhere. “But yes, as we expand the usage scenarios, bringing in things like baby crib recalls becomes very viable, especially when we go live with a gift list function.”

The historical alerts, however, were deliberately avoided, Smith said, because of perceived privacy concerns. “Yes, we can alert to past purchased items, but are staying away from it initially because of privacy concerns,” he said. “People aren’t too keen on you keeping track of what they are shopping for, from what we can tell thus far.”

That argument is similar to the one posited by Macy’s when pressed by Los Angeles authorities to reveal the names of customers who bought children’s jewelry tainted with dangerous lead: “Macy’s promises its customers to keep their personal information confidential except in certain limited circumstances,” said the retailer in a legal filing as it fought the city district attorney’s attempt to secure the names of those who bought the jewelry. “Macy’s customers therefore have a reasonable expectation that any identifying information collected and retained by Macy’s as a result of their purchases will be kept confidential and not disclosed unless Macy’s is compelled to do so by proper legal process.”

We’re not so sure this argument makes a lot of sense. Was Macy’s suggesting that a mother would be irritated and feel that her privacy was violated if the retailer called her and said the necklace her daughter is playing with is poisonous? Don’t you think gratitude might play a more prominent role? (OK, after the pediatrician, her next call might be to a lawyer, which is what Macy’s was truly concerned about. Whatever the reason, concern for the health of its customers and customers’ children was certainly not present.)

Is ReachEverywhere making the same argument? Call us crazy, but we’d like to be told that the box of crackers we put on our iPhone shopping list last month has now been found to be tainted. We might still have it in our pantry.

The Shopper app uses proprietary keyword matching to integrate real-time FDA/USDA recall information and issue warnings when users place recalled items on their interactive shopping lists. The vendor has put together an impressive list of retailers that are cooperating and helping the core functionality of the app, which is a mobile shopping list. Among the initial retailers publicly saying they’re integrating with the app are Target, Meijer, Babies”R”Us, Best Buy, Bloomingdales, CVS, Dick’s Sporting Goods, Dollar General, J.C. Penney, Kmart, Lowe’s, Macy’s, Office Depot, Office Max, Sears, Staples, Home Depot, Toys”R”Us, Walgreens, Ace Hardware, ABC Warehouse, AJ’s Fine Foods, Advance Auto Parts, Albertson’s, Bashas Supermarkets, Dillard’s, Food City, Giant Food, Gander Mountain, Jo-Ann Stores, Kohl’s, Marsh Supermarkets, Michaels, Nordstrom, O’Reilly Autoparts, Payless Shoes, PEP Boys, PETCO, PetSmart, Publix, RadioShack, Raley’s, Ritz Camera, Save Rite, Shaw’s Supermarkets, ShopKo, Sports Authority, Stop & Shop, Bon-Ton Stores, Tractor Supply, Winn Dixie and CompUSA.

The app’s recall integration seems to work well enough. When we placed “ground beef” on our list, the iPhone issued a small alert about a current ground beef recall.

This whole discussion also brings to mind the issue of retailer use of CRM data to reach out and warn customers. As Costco and (unfortunately only a handful of) others have demonstrated, it’s easy for retailers to use loyalty card-based purchase records to send E-mails or automated phone calls to customers who, according to CRM records, purchased products that are later found to be somehow dangerous. However, too many merchants are afraid that issuing those warnings to loyalty cardholders will make them realize just how close modern, technology-driven retailing has come to being Big Brother.


Comments are closed.


StorefrontBacktalk delivers the latest retail technology news & analysis. Join more than 60,000 retail IT leaders who subscribe to our free weekly email. Sign up today!

Most Recent Comments

Why Did Gonzales Hackers Like European Cards So Much Better?

I am still unclear about the core point here-- why higher value of European cards. Supply and demand, yes, makes sense. But the fact that the cards were chip and pin (EMV) should make them less valuable because that demonstrably reduces the ability to use them fraudulently. Did the author mean that the chip and pin cards could be used in a country where EMV is not implemented--the US--and this mis-match make it easier to us them since the issuing banks may not have as robust anti-fraud controls as non-EMV banks because they assumed EMV would do the fraud prevention for them Read more...
Two possible reasons that I can think of and have seen in the past - 1) Cards issued by European banks when used online cross border don't usually support AVS checks. So, when a European card is used with a billing address that's in the US, an ecom merchant wouldn't necessarily know that the shipping zip code doesn't match the billing code. 2) Also, in offline chip countries the card determines whether or not a transaction is approved, not the issuer. In my experience, European issuers haven't developed the same checks on authorization requests as US issuers. So, these cards might be more valuable because they are more likely to get approved. Read more...
A smart card slot in terminals doesn't mean there is a reader or that the reader is activated. Then, activated reader or not, the U.S. processors don't have apps certified or ready to load into those terminals to accept and process smart card transactions just yet. Don't get your card(t) before the terminal (horse). Read more...
The marketplace does speak. More fraud capacity translates to higher value for the stolen data. Because nearly 100% of all US transactions are authorized online in real time, we have less fraud regardless of whether the card is Magstripe only or chip and PIn. Hence, $10 prices for US cards vs $25 for the European counterparts. Read more...
@David True. The European cards have both an EMV chip AND a mag stripe. Europeans may generally use the chip for their transactions, but the insecure stripe remains vulnerable to skimming, whether it be from a false front on an ATM or a dishonest waiter with a handheld skimmer. If their stripe is skimmed, the track data can still be cloned and used fraudulently in the United States. If European banks only detect fraud from 9-5 GMT, that might explain why American criminals prefer them over American bank issued cards, who have fraud detection in place 24x7. Read more...

Our apologies. Due to legal and security copyright issues, we can't facilitate the printing of Premium Content. If you absolutely need a hard copy, please contact customer service.