Apple begins prompting iOS 15 users for consent to enable Personalized Ads for their Apple ID, which was previously on by default and led to antitrust scrutiny
The asymmetry at the heart of this story dates back to iOS 14, when reporting flagged that Apple Advertising was on by default even as rival ad networks were being forced to ask permission to track. The App Tracking Transparency prompt, delayed and then rolled out from late 2020, made consent the gate for everyone — except Apple's own first-party ads, which drew antitrust scrutiny for that very exemption.
Now, alongside iOS 15, Apple is applying its own medicine to itself: users are being prompted to opt in to Personalized Ads on their Apple ID rather than having it enabled silently. The move lands just as regulators are actively probing whether Apple's apps received more favorable consent treatment than third-party developers' — making this a pre-emptive concession as much as a privacy gesture.
First-order effects
Apple's first-party ads business faces the same opt-in attrition it imposed on rivals via App Tracking Transparency — its own targeting reach now depends on user consent rates rather than defaults.
Second-order effects
Third-party developers and ad networks gain a fairness argument they can cite: with Apple's ads no longer default-on, the level playing field Apple marketed becomes harder to dispute in antitrust filings.
Third-order effects
If regulators keep pressing on consent-prompt parity — as Germany's ATT findings suggest — platform owners may converge on a single consent standard where first-party and third-party data use are gated identically, eroding the structural advantage of owning the operating system's ad slot.
The trend: Platform self-preferencing in advertising is being forced into retreat as consent requirements that platforms built for others get applied to their own ad inventory.
Each Super Follow is an In-App Purchase on the App Store, but because there are too many IAPs for the Twitter app, the App Store only shows 10 instead of the full list https://twitter.com/...
Apple is exposing a prompt in iOS 15 that asks users to opt into “Personalized Ads,” but the setting only applies to its own ad network (1/X) https://9to5mac.com/... https://twitter.com/...
(Naturally, Apple did not do this of its own free will and probably the change comes as a response to the antitrust complaints from the French competition authorities et al.)
Apple's rule for other developers: you have to ask users if they want to be “tracked” for ad targeting But Apple's own ad tracking is “personalization,” which sounds much less nefarious https://twitter.com/...
Apple has offered small concession in easing App Store rules for ‘reader apps’ like Netflix. The change is set to take effect early next year and will be applied globally, said Apple, which will retain ultimate say over which apps qualify as reader apps. https://www.reuters.com/.…
It took the full weight of a national antitrust investigation to make Apple budge by ‘a single link’ for a /subset/ of App Store apps, a policy change that would require no development or code changes on Apple's part. We've got a loooong road ahead of us https://twitter.com/...
Wow. Apple decides the “ask app not to track” language is a bit too leading for its own ad network. If this comes to pass, it could be the most clear cut example of anti-competitive action to date inside Apple's monopoly https://twitter.com/...
And meanwhile the Apple tracking system gets put at the bottom of the privacy page, separate from all the other tracking. 🤷🏻♂ ️ https://twitter.com/...
Apple finally accepted that it needs to get consent for tracking, even though it thinks doing tracking on the device is ipso facto private (screenshot from the new iOS beta) https://twitter.com/...
Has anyone seen the “I pay a crapload of $$$ for Apple hardware and services and don't want to see any ads just the most relevant results.” option? https://twitter.com/...
@PatrickMcGee_ The problem is that “Personalized Advertising” is the *what*, not the how. The how is tracking vs. on-device data collection. Apple allows itself to use the What in the headline of its prompt, but it forces everyone else to lead with the How.
This could very well be abuse of power, as Apple defines first party data in a self-preferencing way that few can replicate. But “hypocrisy” misses the mark. It's not different from Facebook using Facebook data to serve ads, which Facebook can still do under Apple's privacy rules…
3/ I even offered up a mock-up prompt that looks very similar to the one that Apple is utilizing for this Ads Personalization setting that is only relevant to its own ad network! https://twitter.com/...
This much should be clear for Apple: You can't do targeted advertising without targeting. What's not clear is if you can make enough money without advertising, given the relentless demand of hyper growth of Services revenue from the Street. ↓ https://twitter.com/...
It seems that #Apple is taking the initiative to hold themselves to the same #privacy practices they hold #AppStore developers to. However, just a thought... It doesn't mention if they will use #iMessage data to personalize ads. I don't think most people would be okay with that. …
This is great, but also shows how effective Facebook et al were at falsely conflating 1st party and 3rd party ads and getting that narrative embraced and extended through media and governments (Odds that Facebook et al will put a similar pop-up in for their 1st party ads?) https:…
Good change here on Apple's part to bring its ad targeting transparency in line with what third-party apps are required to do because of ATT https://9to5mac.com/... (previous discussion on the injustice here: https://bzamayo.com/...)