Home Data Privacy Roundup Why Are So Many US Companies Using Cookie Banners On Their Websites?

Why Are So Many US Companies Using Cookie Banners On Their Websites?

SHARE:

Most people would agree with this statement: “Pop-ups are annoying.”

A rather amusing article in The Verge laments the recent unfortunate revival of website pop-ups, which the author describes as dogging them through the hellscape of their internet experience with messages pushing them to like, subscribe, click, listen, sign in and accept all.

But some pop-ups aren’t just detrimental to the user experience of a website – they’re worse than pointless from a privacy perspective.

Under fire

Although it’s not legally required, many websites in the US have started using cookie banners in a misguided attempt to protect themselves from lawyers who smell blood in the water.

The plaintiff’s bar is well known for getting creative with their application of the law to support often tenuous class-action claims, including the 1998 Video Privacy Protection Act (VPPA) and state anti-wiretapping statutes. Both are increasingly used as the basis for privacy-focused lawsuits.

The VPPA, for example, is a law that was passed back when Blockbuster was still a hot commodity. It prohibits “video tape service providers” from sharing personally identifiable information about the videos someone has watched without their permission.

Several years ago, a wave of lawsuits attempted to extend the definition of “video tape service provider” to any business that has a website capable of playing video, such as Hulu. More recently, lawyers have been trying to broaden the definition even further to include social platforms.

According to an analysis by Bloomberg Law, at least 47 proposed class-action lawsuits were filed between October and February 2022 claiming that Meta is in violation of the VPPA because its tracking pixel shares personal video consumption data with Facebook without consent.

These suits have met with mixed success. Some have been thrown out, some were voluntarily pulled, and others have been allowed to proceed. But companies are still nervous.

And so some are using cookie banners and tracking consent pop-ups on their websites as an ill-conceived shield from frivolous lawsuits.

Subscribe

AdExchanger Daily

Get our editors’ roundup delivered to your inbox every weekday.

Comic: Bark PatternsThe “cons” in consent

But there are a lot of problems with that “strategy.”

One: It’s reactive to lawyers as opposed to laws, at least in the US. There’s no legal basis for cookie banners outside of Europe. Most cookie banners are designed to address EU data protection obligations (and not all that effectively, if we’re being honest).

Unlike GDPR, which is an opt-in law, US laws mostly take an opt-out approach (other than for certain types of sensitive information).

Two: Cookie banners don’t help companies comply with US state privacy laws, none of which require consent pop-ups.

“These banners are regularly repackaged and marketed by consent management platforms as US privacy-complaint,” Daniel Goldberg, a partner at Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz, told me. “Companies that deploy cookie banners may believe that they have satisfied ‘Do Not Sell’ and other opt-out obligations under US law when they actually have not.”

Three: People hate pop-ups, and the more they’re forced to see them, the less they register. Decision fatigue is real.

Four: Cookie banners are open to misinterpretation.

At an IAB Tech Lab Rearc privacy event in New York City in February, Jessica Lee, a partner and chair of the privacy, security and data innovation practice at Loeb & Loeb, told a story about her mother, who once commented that only websites that display cookie banners actually use cookies. Which is, of course, not the case. All websites use cookies.

Five: Companies need to be careful about the language they use in a cookie banner and the choices they offer. If a website gives someone the opportunity to opt out of all cookie tracking, for example, then that site is on the hook to honor the opt-out, even though it wasn’t legally required to ask.

“If someone clicks your opt-out and leaves your site with the impression that they’ve successfully been opted out of cookies and they haven’t been,” Lee said, “I think there’s even some risk of deception there.”

Well then. 🤯

Speaking of consent, I’d like to say thanks for opting in to receive this newsletter. Let me know what you think of it! Drop me a line at allison@adexchanger.com.

Must Read

Jamie Seltzer, global chief data and technology officer, Havas Media Network, speaks to AdExchanger at CES 2026.

CES 2026: What’s Real – And What’s BS – When It Comes To AI

Ad industry experts call out trends to watch in 2026 and separate the real AI use cases having an impact today from the AI hype they heard at CES.

New Startup Pinch AI Tackles The Growing Problem Of Ecommerce Return Scams

Fraud is eating into retail profits. A new startup called Pinch AI just launched with $5 million in funding to fight back.

Comic: Shopper Marketing Data

CPG Data Seller SPINS Moves Into Media With MikMak Acquisition

On Wednesday, retail and CPG data company SPINS added a new piece with its acquisition of MikMak, a click-to-buy ad tech and analytics startup that helps optimize their commerce media.

Privacy! Commerce! Connected TV! Read all about it. Subscribe to AdExchanger Newsletters

How Valvoline Shifted Marketing Gears When It Became A Pure-Play Retail Brand

Believe it or not, car oil change service company Valvoline is in the midst of a fascinating retail marketing transformation.

AdExchanger's Big Story podcast with journalistic insights on advertising, marketing and ad tech

The Big Story: Live From CES 2026

Agents, streamers and robots, oh my! Live from the C-Space campus at the Aria Casino in Las Vegas, our team breaks down the most interesting ad tech trends we saw at CES this year.

Monopoly Man looks on at the DOJ vs. Google ad tech antitrust trial (comic).

2025: The Year Google Lost In Court And Won Anyway

From afar, it looks like Google had a rough year in antitrust court. But zoom in a bit and it becomes clear that the past year went about as well as Google could have hoped for.