We’ve talked a lot about behavioral targeting, including a recent package in Classified Intelligence Report. Now reporter Emily Steel of The Wall Street Journal has put it to the test. She asked Revenue Science, a leading targeted-ad-placement company, and Acxiom, a direct marketing (postal mail and phone) to show her their profiles of her.

Good article. She clearly explains the theory behind targeting of advertising, and the various demographic “slices” that targeting companies use. She said “Acxiom seemed to have a better handle than Revenue Science on the kinds of ads that might get my attention,” and she explained why.

“One reason behavioral targeting is still such an imperfect science is that firms can easily make false assumptions, especially if they are relying on Web-only information. Executives at some firms I talked with said, for example, that if I were to visit an airline site and then a bridal registry — as I did recently — their technology would peg me as a newlywed. In fact, I was shopping for a friend who is getting married. …

“As they try to refine their technology, targeted marketing companies aren’t aiming to create profiles of every individual consumer — that’s too inefficient and not very useful for marketers. Instead, they want to make sure that the profiles they have created about consumers actually fit. Separately, these companies also have to find a way to deal with the growing privacy concerns — among lawmakers, privacy advocates and consumers — surrounding the field of ad targeting.”

(A subscription may be required to read the article.)