The GPC Storm Is Brewing

GPC isn't DNT

In 2009, privacy advocates introduced a novel concept: A browser-based opt-out called "Do Not Track" (DNT). This global on/off control would allow users to block all web tracking and targeting with a single click. DNT quickly gained support from major browsers like Chrome, Safari, and Firefox. However, by 2013 it was effectively sidelined, and in 2019 the W3C disbanded the working group. Today, only a couple of browsers still support the signal. What led to the failure of this promising privacy control?

Why DNT Failed

DNT was initially envisioned as a "halo feature" for browsers—a simple way to solve for consumer privacy. The primary challenge arose when publishers realized DNT’s potential impact on their revenue. The loss of personalization and reporting decreased their revenue per ad. DNT was designed as an industry standard, requiring agreement from both browsers (who would enable the signal) and publishers (who would respect it). Because publishers lost revenue when the signal was applied, they had little incentive to support the standard.

Pushback from publishers and ad tech was strong. Additionally, new entrants created network tools and VPNs to either set the signal broadly or ignore it completely. Ultimately, industry trust in DNT was lost, and the standard died.

The New Playing Field: GPC supported by regulation and users

If browser-based opt-outs failed, why are we now discussing a new browser-based opt-out, the “Global Privacy Control” (GPC)? What has changed? The answer: a lot.

1. Consumer Empowerment

In 2009, people had few options to control their online experience; ad blocking and tracker blocking tools were nascent, and VPNs were primarily enterprise-level tools for corporations. Consumers simply weren't used to the idea of taking an active role in managing privacy. Today, privacy tools are commonplace, with some services reporting that over 40% of web browser users employ some type of user-based blocking.

2. Regulatory Mandates

The other fundamental shift is the landscape of consumer protection laws. US regulations like California’s CCPA, Colorado’s CPA, and Connecticut’s CPA now explicitly require adherence to browser-based opt-out signals. US Publishers can’t just say they won’t play along.

The European Decision Point

Does this mean browser-based controls will finally stick? Not necessarily.

In Europe, debate continues over the effectiveness and potential impact of browser-based consent controls. The advertising industry, already hurt by AI decreasing their traffic, is arguing that blanket browser-based controls do not meet the per-site consent requirements of GDPR. The friction stems from a very familiar fear: that all-or-nothing browser-based controls will eliminate publisher’s ability to track consumers and personalize ads. Instead, they want to continue to use consent banners to persuade consumers to opt-in, keeping tracking alive through annoyance. Fighting your customer rarely works. And with US regulatory alignment to newly established browser-based controls, European publishers need not just convince regulators the browser-based controls should not be allowed, they’ll also need to convince the global browser makers to remove them in Europe.

A Balanced Solution: Rewarded Interest

This doesn’t need to be an all-or-nothing fight. Solutions exist that provide consumers with full privacy control without driving high opt-out rates. The key is to genuinely make the consumer part of the advertising value equation.

Rewarded Interest is one such tool. It operates as an extension, allowing consumers to set their consent preferences once and have them applied as they browse. Acting as an informal form of global privacy control, it allows users to op out (like GPC), opt in, or set preferences anywhere in-between — either through defaults or on a per-site basis.

Has this tool brought downfall to the publisher community? The evidence suggests otherwise. Rewarded Interest has demonstrated that XX% of its consumers choose to allow tracking. How is this possible? By providing a separate mechanism for consumers to get a share of advertiser spend Rewarded Interest rebalances the advertising model. Consumers receive an additional benefit, and publishers maintain their ability to deliver high-performing, targeted ads.

The tracking control wars are indeed heating up again, but with a new playing field—shaped by both regulation and consumer-centric tools—it looks like the consumers are going to win.