"A first-party cookie is set by the domain that you are visiting and only available there. So, if I visit website A.com, that would drop a first-party cookie that is tied only to the website A.com. If I was to then go on to website B.com, or C.com, they wouldn't be able to access and see that cookie. By contrast, a third-party cookie is set by a domain outside of the domain that you're on. As I move to other websites, if they have that same resource, they can access that third-party cookie and track my movements across sites. It's an important distinction as it is only third-party cookies that are going to disappear - first-party cookies will remain, which can still be a very useful tool for marketers."
"The answer is absolutely, yes, because first-party cookies are still in play. Of course, if we are within Europe (and bound by the regulations of GDPR) we'll need user consent for any first-party cookies that are being dropped."
"One is that it solves the identifier problem of third-party cookies going away. If we're capturing an email address, where we've shown"
A first-party cookie is set by the domain being visited and is only available there; a third-party cookie is set by an external domain and can be accessed across sites to track users. Browsers and platforms are phasing out third-party cookies while first-party cookies will remain useful for marketers. Cookie banners and consent remain necessary, particularly in Europe under GDPR, for first-party cookies that collect user data. Google paused federated cohort testing and new ID frameworks are emerging, creating uncertainty. A robust first-party data strategy, such as collecting email addresses, can replace third-party identifiers for targeting and measurement.
Read at The Drum
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]