This is what I am going to talk to you about in this article, but first, an introduction.
May 25, 2018 marked a major impact on the digital world: the arrival of the GDPR (European General Data Protection Regulation), which shook the foundations of digital marketing by transforming the rules for the processing of personal information and generating a new dimension of consent in the processing of data for commercial purposes.
Some realized that handling personal data of others entails responsibilities and obligations and decided to make substantial changes in their strategies to adapt to the regulations, others, simply overwhelmed by the fear of sanctions, decided to undertake cosmetic changes and update their texts and policies on their websites, if there is non-compliance, at least let it not be noticed.
During all this time, a whole range of myths, fake news and half-truths have emerged in relation to the application of the GDPR, which have circulated like wildfire on the networks and generated all kinds of non-compliance and risks of sanctions.
With this post, I hope to expose you and prevent you from falling into scams that can be very costly at a legal, reputational and economic level.
With Brand Monitoring
Control your reputation and what is said about you
Enter your domain
Try it now! →
ADS illustration
The power of opportunity and lies in the GDPR
In Spain, data protection is a marginal issue for many and non-existent philippine area code for others.
The GDPR bubble lasted as long as prepubescent love affairs, as I explained in my last post for Semrush when referring to blog anarchy.
The fact is that haste has never been a good advisor and, amidst so much desperation to have everything resolved in the face of the dreaded 25M, so much apocalyptic discourse and so many opportunistic opinion-makers, all kinds of myths, fake news and serious hoaxes were created, creating a scenario of confusion that needs to be remedied.
Self-employed workers, companies, institutions and bloggers, among others, were exposed to all kinds of contradictory information and fake news.
Opportunists of fear and anarchy fought over the headlines with equal care, each master with his own little book, but who should we believe?
On the other hand, if we are honest, when it comes to establishing our peculiar belief system, “the version that suits my interests the most is the correct one” is what gave rise to many alternative versions of the GDPR that enjoyed great acceptance among the commentators.
If a marketing professional with a large audience says that consent should not be regulated because he read it somewhere and a data protection consultant says the opposite, it is very possible that the marketer's version will have much more credibility than the consultant's, due to the premise I raised at the beginning.
And so it happened, many professionals and companies gave full credibility to the brothe
r-in-law's allegations in the form of news, posted on the networks.
These allegations, coupled with less than clear examples of compliance, created very unique versions of the GDPR that we consultants had to battle tirelessly with.