第1集：与Penningtons Manches Cooper LLP合伙人John Doherty探讨数字广告行业的监管

有一些消费者法律专门用来防止不公平的合同条款。

There are consumer laws that specifically seek to protect against unfair contract terms.

即使在一定程度上，合理性也可以适用于商业协议。

Even just to some extent, reasonableness can come into commercial agreements as well.

但确实，消费者得到了更好的保护。

But definitely, yeah, consumers are better protected.

欢迎收听AdTech Heroes播客。

Welcome to the AdTech Heroes podcast.

每一集都会采访当今广告技术领域的领导者。

Each episode features an interview with today's leaders in advertising technology.

如果你在广告技术行业工作，一直想和当今的专家交流学习，那么这个节目就是为你准备的。

If you're working in AdTech and always wanted to sit down and pick the brains of today's experts, then this show is for you.

每周订阅并加入我们，认识新的AdTech英雄。

Subscribe and join us each week as we meet a new AdTech Hero.

本期节目由Seedtag赞助，Seedtag是全球领先的上下文广告公司。

This episode is brought to you by Seedtag, the world's leading contextual advertising company.

情境智能让你能够在无cookie的情况下，在消费者感兴趣的领域内与他们互动。

Contextual intelligence allows you to engage with consumers within their universe of interest on a cookie free basis.

通过在内容中投放广告，我们能更快地吸引用户的注意力，并更长时间地保持他们的关注。

By delivering ads into content, we capture users' attention faster and retain it longer.

了解更多信息，请访问seedtag.com与我们联系。

Learn more and reach out to us at seedtag.com.

大家好，欢迎收听AdTech Heroes播客。

Hello, and welcome to the AdTech Heroes podcast.

在今天的节目中，我们将讨论数字广告行业的监管问题，很高兴邀请到John Doherty。

In today's episode, we are going to talk about regulation in the digital advertising industry, and I'm delighted to be joined by John Doherty.

John是国际律师事务所Penningtons Manches Cooper LLP的合伙人。

John is a partner at international law firm Penningtons Manches Cooper LLP.

他为来自不同行业的公司提供咨询服务，帮助他们处理纠纷以及日益增多的监管义务，以确保消费者权益。

He advises companies from various industry sectors on disputes and the ever increasing number of regulatory obligations they face to ensure consumer protection.

你好，Jan。

Hello, Jan.

最近怎么样？

How's it going?

挺好的。

Very well.

谢谢。

Thank you.

很高兴能和你一起。

Glad to be with you.

我们已经录了好几期播客了，但可以说之前还没有请过法律背景的嘉宾。

We've done a few of these podcasts now, but safe to say we've not had anyone from a legal background.

到目前为止，来的都是营销专业人士。

It's all been marketing professionals that we've had up until now.

所以非常高兴你能来，今天能和你聊聊我也很期待。

So great to have you on board, I'm excited to be speaking with you today.

我们先从一个问题开始吧。

Let's kick start off with a question.

你觉得数字广告行业的监管程度怎么样？

How regulated is the digital advertising industry in your opinion?

我马上给你一个典型的律师式回答。

I'll give a typically lawyer's answer immediately.

看你去问谁了。

Depends who you ask.

如果你问业内的人，他们可能会说，哎呀，监管太多了。

If you ask people in the industry, they'll probably say, oh, the regulation is just too much.

来得又快又猛，我们什么都做不了。

It's coming thick and fast, and we can't do anything.

如果你问消费者权益和隐私保护的活动人士，他们会说，监管在哪里？

If you ask consumer rights privacy campaigners, they'll say, Where's the regulation?

就算有监管，真的有人去跟进和执行吗？

And even when it is there, is anybody actually following it up and enforcing it?

我想，对消费者来说，它真正的意义是什么。

What is its real meaning for the consumer, I suppose.

我觉得这取决于你的视角。

I guess it depends on your perspective.

就拿cookies来说吧，可以说监管是足够的。

I mean, if we take the example of cookies, then arguably there is enough.

《通用数据保护条例》，也就是我们都很熟悉的GDPR，里面已经有足够的规定来保护用户的权利了。

There's enough in the general data protection regulation, which we're all so familiar with, the GDPR, to protect users' rights.

但是呢，当然也有这样的情况：企业认为自己是在遵守这些规定，但实际上是否真的按照保护人们的初衷来执行，是有争议的。因为有人会说，这些规定太复杂了，选项太多，人们要么没时间，要么懒得去选，就直接点了“全部允许”，这样一来就违背了初衷。

But then, of course, there are instances where the way that businesses are actually, as far as they're concerned, complying with those regulations, there's dispute as to whether they are actually complying in the way it was intended to protect people because the argument is it's far too confusing, multiple selections are there and people partly run out of time or lose the will to live and just click allow all, and so it's defeating the object.

但就像我说的，另一种观点是，这些规定太严格了。

But as I say, another perspective is it's just all far too strict.

这降低了企业和投资的积极性，等等。

It's reducing incentive for business and, you know, for investment, etcetera.

所以，意见分歧很大。

So, you know, differences of opinion.

我觉得从cookies、数据隐私这个角度开始聊挺好的。你合作的那些客户，或者你所在的行业，他们有没有在考虑这些问题？

I think that's a great place to start in terms of the cookie list environment, data privacy, the clients that you work with, or just generally in the sector that you work in, are they, you know, are they thinking about this?

他们有没有像媒体代理、媒体所有者，比如Seedtag和出版商那样，深入思考这个问题呢？

Are they thinking about it in as much detail as, for example, the media agencies are, the media owners are, such as Seedtag and the publishers?

品牌方对这个问题考虑得有多深？

How much are the brands thinking about this?

他们真的会来找你咨询和寻求指导吗？

And are they really coming to you for advice and guidance on this matter?

品牌方确实非常非常担心，因为数据太重要了，尤其是数据采集，当然，在消费者保护等很多领域都有相关法规。

Brands are definitely very, very concerned because data is so important, picking data in particular, but of course there's regulation across many different areas for consumer protection in particular.

是的，品牌方非常担心，因为和其他人一样，他们也在争夺市场份额，不想被落下，所以他们总是想尽一切办法来推动市场、竞争并领先。

But yeah, brands are very concerned because, like everyone else, they're competing for their share of the market and they don't want to be left behind, and so they are always seeking to use whatever means are available to push their markets forward, to compete and to get ahead.

这就是那种自然的商业适者生存的本能。

That's that kind of natural business survival of the fittest sort of instinct.

所以，是的，他们非常想知道自己能做什么、不能做什么，我想这就是我们发挥作用的地方。特别是，我们律所有很多专门提供数据隐私咨询的律师，因为这本身已经成为一个很大的领域。

So yeah, they're very keen to know what they can do and what they can't, and I suppose that's where we come in, And in particular, we've got many lawyers in the firm who specialise in just advising on data privacy, because that's become such a big area in and of itself.

你觉得不同国家之间有什么不同？

And how would you say it differs from country to country?

你显然在英国，我也是。

You're obviously based in The UK, as am I.

你有没有发现，你的品牌在不同国家运营或跨国家合作时，处理方式会有所不同？

Do you find that there's a different tact in different countries that your brands either operate in or work across?

当然。

Definitely.

而且，这不仅仅局限于数据或广告，可能涉及很多不同的监管领域。

And again, that's not just necessarily data or advertising, but that could be across lots of different areas of regulation.

这确实给任何企业都带来了一点两难的境地，因为一方面，他们可能会说，如果B国或C国的监管比A国宽松得多，那我们为什么要那么做呢？

And that creates a slight dilemma, I suppose, for any business because on the one hand, they could say, well, if regulation is much less restrictive in territory B or C than it is in A, why would we do that?

为什么不尽可能少做一点呢？

Why would we not do as little as possible?

但另一方面，在品牌声誉和推广方面，还有其他重要的因素，比如，你是否愿意因此告诉某个国家的消费者，他们不那么重要？

But then other big important factors in terms of brand reputation and promotion is that do you want, by the same token, to tell the consumers in one territory that they're less important?

或者，再举个例子，比如安全问题。

Or let's say, taking another example, safety.

比如说，欧洲或者美国的安全标准可能很高，一方面有法规监管，另一方面如果消费者受到伤害，还可能面临集体诉讼的风险。

Maybe the safety provisions in Europe or in The US, let's say, are quite high, policed partly by regulation but also policed by the potential for class actions if anyone is going to be harmed.

这算是另一种由消费者或律师推动的监管形式。

That's another sort of consumer or lawyer led sort of form of regulation.

但如果你在法庭上，或者在美国，陪审团还审理很多民事案件，你很难解释为什么一部分消费者被当作二等公民对待。

But it's never ever going to look good or be very easy to explain to a court, or if it's in The US, for instance, where juries still hear a lot of the civil claims as to why one set of consumers were being treated as second class citizens to another.

所以我觉得，虽然理论上不同地区有不同的制度，但品牌从声誉和ESG的角度出发，会尽量保持公平，对所有消费者一视同仁。

So I think for brands, although theoretically there are different regimes, they will try as far as possible from a reputational and ESG perspective to make sure that they keep a level playing field and treat all of their consumers the same.

那你觉得英国脱欧对这方面有什么影响？

And how do you feel Brexit is impacting a lot of that?

我主要指的是GDPR和欧洲范围内的那些实践和法规。

So I'm referring really to kind of GDPR and European wide practices and regulations that have been put in place.

现在美国也类似地实施了这些规定。

We've obviously got the similar applied in The States now as well.

那么你觉得像英国脱欧这样的变化对这方面有什么影响呢？

So how would you say that, you know, the likes of Brexit have impacted that?

那么，在广告领域的监管方面，英国是领先的，还是欧洲市场在引领潮流呢？

And if anything, are The UK leading or European markets leading the way when it comes to regulation in the advertising space?

我认为欧盟绝对是标准的制定者，尤其是在数据隐私等领域。

I think the EU has definitely been a standard bearer, certainly in areas like data privacy.

而且，虽然我们还在欧盟的时候，我们算是比较新的，还在摸索阶段，就像带着辅助轮或游泳圈一样，现在要自己闯荡世界了。

And whilst we've been in the EU, so we're still relatively new, sort of finding our feet with our training wheels on or our armbands, making our own way in the world now.

所以目前变化不大，因为英国政府已经说了，一旦我们离开欧盟，基本上我们所有的欧盟法律、法规和实践都会被保留下来，这在技术上叫做“保留法律”，而且目前变化不大。

So not really much has changed as yet because what the government here has said is that once we leave the EU, basically everything that we had in terms of EU law and regulation and practices is set in stone what's called technically the retained law, and that hasn't really changed much.

区别在于，理论上我们又有能力去改变和做我们想做的事情，但现实政治是，我们都必须与人合作，国家也必须与其他国家合作。

The difference is we can theoretically, again, we've got the ability to change and do what we want, but the real world politics is we all have to work together with people and countries have to work together with other countries.

所以英国有能力做自己想做的事，但我认为实际上不太可能，而且目前变化也不大，我认为未来也不太可能改变，因为，再说，在数据转移等方面，如果我们想采取一项被认为对数据保护不够充分的政策，那么欧盟就不会允许我们享有与他们合作的同等特权，因为他们会说，你们会从后门放任何东西进来。

And so The UK has the ability to do what it wants, but I think in reality it's not likely or hasn't changed a great deal yet, I don't think it's likely to change because, again, when it comes to things like data transfers, when we're working with the EU, if we wanted to take a policy that was considered to be not particularly protective of data, well then the EU is not going to allow us the same privileges of working with them, because they'll say, well, you'd let whatever in by the back door.

所以理论上是可以的，但我认为到目前为止，我们看到脱欧并不会带来什么戏剧性的变化。

So theoretically, yes, but I think so far we're seeing that Brexit isn't really going to bring about any dramatic changes.

所以你认为英国不会因为现在脱离欧洲了，就放弃GDPR或那些欧洲法规吗？

So you don't think The UK is going to think, you know, we're out of Europe now, get out of GDPR or regulations and those type of European regulations.

你不会看到我们回到你刚才提到的那个点，也就是我们需要共享信息。

You don't see us going back to the point that you just mentioned now, which is we need to share information.

我们需要分享最佳实践。

We need to share best practices.

你觉得……

Do you think...

这是你认为英国不会……

Is that the main reason why you think that The U...

完全脱离的主要原因吗？

UK won't just completely come out of it?

我觉得这些是实际上的限制。

I think I think that they're the sort of practical constraints.

所以我说理论上是可以的，尤其是对那些最坚定的脱欧派来说，他们想要夺回控制权，想做什么就做什么，掌握自己的命运。

So I say, you know, that the theory is there, and especially for those who are the most ardent Brexiteers, who's sort of taking back control and we can do what we want and we're masters of our own destiny.

但现实是，每个人在一定程度上，包括各个州、各个国家，都受到他们所处环境的限制，而且每个人都必须合作。

But the reality is everybody to a certain extent, including states, including countries, they're restricted by the environment in which they work and everyone has to work together.

我们可能已经脱离了欧盟，但在地理上、物理上我们仍然在欧洲，并且与我们的邻国合作。

We may have left the European Union, but we're still in Europe geographically, physically and working with our neighbours.

实际上，我认为英国在大多数方面对欧盟所做的多数事情都是相当认同的。

Actually, think The UK in most regards is pretty sympathetic to most of what was being done.

再说一次，这总是最糟糕的，但可能只是欧洲的少数改革或某些做法引起了不成比例的不满，最终导致了脱欧。

I mean, again, which is always the worst, but it was only probably a very small percentage of reforms or certain practices in Europe that seemed to cause a disproportionate amount of angst leading to Brexit.

但我认为在大多数事情上，我们很可能会保持相当平稳，而且我认为未来我们也会如此，也许可以看看像人工智能这样的领域。

But I think on most things, we're likely to stay pretty level, and I think going forward we will as well, maybe looking at things like artificial intelligence.

我认为那将是一个新的战场，因为我觉得很多人对人工智能将如何运作以及它是否会让人受到偏见感到相当害怕，因为没有人确切理解它将如何运作，而且实际上人们担心它是在一个相当狭隘的思维框架内被设计出来的。

I think that's going to be a new battleground because I think a lot of people are quite afraid as to how this artificial intelligence is going to work and whether it's going to prejudice people because, you know, there's just no one understanding exactly how it's going to work and actually being concerned that it's been a fairly it's been devised, I suppose, in the confines of a fairly narrow mindset.

我的意思是，人们可能会说，比如在硅谷年轻男性的群体中，他们设计并说了，它将如何反应？

Mean, people might say, in the groups of young Silicon Valley men, for instance, they've devised and said, how is it going to react?

它对每个人会有什么影响？

What will its effects be for everyone?

会不会存在固有的偏见，无论是有意的还是无意的？

Are there going to be in built prejudices, whether they're intended or not?

所以我觉得这方面有很多担忧，而且我认为欧盟在这方面采取了前瞻性的做法，并且很关注确保我们作为消费者不会受到偏见。

So I think there's a lot of concern about that, and I think, again, the EU is taking a forward thinking approach to that and is concerned to make sure that we don't, as consumers, get prejudiced.

而且我大体上认为英国很可能会效仿。

And I would generally think that The UK is likely to follow suit.

关于目前存在的那些机构以及它们实施的任何制裁，它们是谁？有没有你能想到的大案例，其中这些制裁被实施了？

In terms of the bodies that are out there currently and imposing any kind of sanctions, Who are they and is there like a big case that you can think of where these have been imposed?

有官方的监管机构，也就是各个国家所称的主管当局。

There are the official regulatory bodies or the competent authorities as they're known in the various states.

比如在竞争领域，为了确保公平竞争，确保我们都能得到公平的待遇。

So in the areas, let's say, of competition, to make sure that there's fair competition, that we're all getting a fair deal.

所以，我们有竞争与市场管理局。

So, we've got the Competition and Markets Authority.

他们的责任是保护消费者的利益，比如防止大公司之间串通定价，或者防止任何占主导地位的公司滥用其主导地位。

It's their responsibility to protect consumers' interests from, let's say, price fixing amongst big companies or any companies that are dominant abusing that dominance.

而且我认为特别是大型科技公司，有很多担忧。

And I think with the big tech companies in particular, there have been a lot of concerns.

他们一直在关注苹果公司，比如要求苹果给企业提供应用访问权限。有很多争议说苹果从这些应用产生的收入中抽成太高了。而且，你知道，有一个案例，一家游戏公司提出了质疑。

They've been brought looking at Apple and giving access to businesses for their apps, for instance, there's been a lot of controversy that they take too big a cut of the revenues generated from the businesses through those apps, And some, know, there's a case where a particular games company has challenged.

但我认为竞争与市场管理局正在全面审视这个问题，想知道这对消费者、他们获得的服务以及他们需要支付的价格有什么影响。

But I think the Competition and Markets Authority are looking generally and wondering how does this impact on the consumers and the service they get and the prices they have to pay.

然后还有信息专员办公室，这是另一个官方的数据监管机构。

And then there's also the Information Commissioner's Office, which is another official regulator for data.

所以他们是官方监管机构，他们确实会进行调查，会罚款，他们有权力，也有手段去监管这些行业。

So they're the official regulators and they do investigate and they impose fines and they've got powers and they've got teeth to try and regulate these industries.

但不仅仅是他们，正如我所说，消费者可以聚集起来，而且越来越多地聚集在一起，组成团体提起集体诉讼。严格来说，这里不像美国那样有典型的集体诉讼，虽然也有几种不同的类型，但为了讨论方便，我们大致称之为集体诉讼。有一个相当知名的案件，已经在高等法院、上诉法院和最高法院审理过，我们目前正在等待最高法院的判决。这个案件是由一位名叫理查德·劳埃德的先生提起的，他曾在消费者协会工作过。他作为代表提起了诉讼，这就是集体诉讼的概念，代表所有iPhone用户。

But it's not just them, are, as I say, the consumers can gather and are increasingly gathering together and forming groups to bring class actions or group it's not strictly class actions typically here as you have in The US, although there are a few different types, but if we, for argument's sake, broadly call them class actions, there's quite a well known case which has been heard at the High Court and heard in the Court of Appeal and has been heard in the Supreme Court, we'll be currently awaiting the judgment of the Supreme Court, and that's a case which was bought by a man called Richard Lloyd, who used to work with WHICH, the Consumers Association, and he brought a claim as a representative, so this is this class action concept, on behalf of all iPhone users.

所以，我是iPhone用户，我不知道你是不是，但我们有很多人，而且很多人甚至都不知道这个诉讼是代表我们提起的。

So, I'm an iPhone user, I don't know if you are, but there are a lot of us, and lots of people won't even have known that this claim was being brought on our behalf.

这是很久以前的事了，谷歌在未经同意的情况下，从iPhone用户那里获取了cookie，没有问我们是否同意，你知道，当我们使用互联网时，他们把这些数据卖给广告商，从中赚了不少钱，但用户并没有得到任何好处，嗯，没有直接的经济利益。

And this was some time back that Google were essentially taking the cookies from iPhone users without consent, without asking us, know, are you happy when we use the internet, and selling it to advertisers and making a good business out of that, but no benefit, well, no financial benefit immediately coming back to the users.

我认为可能会有争论说，也许有些好处是间接的，但劳埃德先生对此提出了异议，他说你们侵犯了所有iPhone用户的数据权利，他们有权获得赔偿。

I think there would be arguments that maybe some benefits were coming back indirectly, and Mr Lloyd took issue with this and said, you you've breached the data rights of all those iPhone users, and they're entitled to compensation.

所以他代表所有iPhone用户提起了这个退出式集体诉讼，并把它提交到了高等法院。

So brought this opt out CLAR on behalf of all iPhone users, brought it to the high court.

高等法院同意谷歌的观点，说这个诉讼太不精确了。

The high court agreed with Google and said, this is just too imprecise.

你提交给我的这个集体诉讼，里面的每个人情况都不一样。

This class that you brought before me, they're all going to be different.

有企业用户，也有个人用户。

There's going be businesses, there could be individuals.

而且他们说，大多数人甚至都不知道自己的数据被使用了，可能也不在乎，不觉得自己受到了什么损害或损失。

And they said, most people wouldn't even have known that their data was being used and maybe couldn't care and don't feel that they've been prejudiced particularly or lost anything.

然后他们还提出了其他技术性的论点，关于这个诉讼是否可以在英国审理。

And then they were also raising other technical arguments about whether they could be served here for this action.

理查德·劳埃德代表iPhone用户向上诉法院提起了上诉，这是我们最近得到的判决，上诉法院推翻了高等法院的裁决，采取了更有利于消费者和iPhone用户的立场，说：不，你们看问题的角度不对。

Richard Lloyd appealed on behalf of the iPhone users to the Court of Appeal, which is the most recent decision we've got, and the Court of Appeal reversed the High Court and took a much more consumer iPhone user friendly approach and said, No, you're looking at it the wrong way.

逻辑是谷歌使用了iPhone用户的数据。

The logic is Google used the data of iPhone users.

这数据显然很有价值，光凭他们卖了这一点就能证明。

It was clearly valuable data just by the dint of the fact they sold it, so that proves it was valuable.

用户没有同意，至少没有明确同意过使用这些数据，所以他们应该得到赔偿。

They didn't give their permission, or certainly didn't give any active permission for that to be used, so they should be compensated.

他们也承认，确实，每个iPhone用户该赔多少可能是个复杂的问题，这几乎可以放到一边单独考虑，从经济角度去评估。

And they accepted that, yeah, it is a complicated question maybe as to how much each iPhone user should be compensated, that's something almost you can push that off to a separate consideration, an economic consideration of what is it.

但原则上，责任问题很清楚，他们说，谷歌应该获得用户同意，但没有做到，iPhone用户确实受到了损失。

But in principle, the liability question is, yes, they said, Google should have gotten the consent, they didn't, and the iPhone users wrote something.

所以这将是一个相当重要的判决。

So that's going to be quite an important decision.

最高法院的判决随时都可能下来，真的。

The judgment is due from the Supreme Court any time now, really.

只是最高法院非常忙，所以要看他们什么时候能抽出时间来做出这个判决。

It's just when the Supreme Court's very busy, so when they get around to actually producing their judgment on this.

所以这是一个非常重要的案件，很多人都在关注，而且大家普遍是从这种额外权力的角度来看，即消费者通过个人和集体诉讼，可以成为对行业的另一种约束，除了正式的监管机构之外。

So that's a really important case which a lot of people are watching, and generally who are watching from a perspective of this additional power, really, where the consumers, through individuals and class actions, can be another restraint on industry in addition to the formal regulators.

这是个有趣的观点。你觉得我们作为消费者，在那些密密麻麻的小字条款里，是不是会漏掉很多信息？我自己也这样，注册新应用、新平台或者别的什么，现在太容易了，点三个按钮就注册好了。

It's an interesting point, and do you think there's a lot of information that gets missed by us as consumers within small print, within pages and pages of, I'm guilty of it myself, signing up to either a new app or a new platform or a new, know, it's just so easy nowadays, you click three buttons and you've signed up to something.

是啊，感觉我可能连自己注册过的一半东西都不清楚。

It's, yeah, you just feel like, you know, I probably don't know half the things that I've signed up to.

所以我也算是给了许可，但就是那种半心半意的。

So I'm kind of giving that permission, but in a half hearted kind of way.

你觉得这是个问题吗？

Do you think that that is an issue?

而且我总想起一个例子，不管是在Facebook上，还是我家里有个Alexa，我跟我妻子聊晚餐计划、晚上干什么或者看什么电影。

And I always go back to the case of whether it's on Facebook or even I've got a Alexa at home is having a conversation with my wife about, I don't know, dinner plans for the day, for the evening, or watching a movie.

然后真的，就几秒钟，我现在就在办公室，我刚说了Alexa，我就听到她，她在听，她一直在听。

And literally a couple of, like now literally, I'm in the office now when I just said Alexa and I just heard, she's listening, she's always listening.

就像你刚聊完天，觉得没人听，但一两个小时后，你就收到那个你正想要的推荐，或者Facebook不可能用其他方式知道该给你推送最新电影的展示广告之类的。

And it's a case where, you know, you've just had a conversation, you don't think anyone's listening, and then an hour or two hours later, you'll get that exact recommendation that you were after or, you know, there's no other way that Facebook would have known, you know, to push the latest movie out to you in display ad or something like that.

这真的在发生吗？

Is that happening?

我这个问题问得有点长，简单来说就是，这种情况真的在发生吗？应该发生吗？

Kind of like long way of asking you the question is that happening and should it be happening?

好吧，我觉得关于我们作为个人，确实会被那些一页页的条款和条件或者链接搞得有点烦，我作为律师也这么说。

Well, I suppose on the question of the fact that we get a bit ground down as individuals, and I say it as a lawyer, with seeing pages of terms and conditions presented or a link through.

但我觉得大多数消费者的做法就是，他们会快速翻过那些页面，因为他们只是想赶紧进入正题。

But I think the practice of most consumers is they'll scroll through the many pages because they just want to get on to the thing.

所以正因为如此，消费者合同，因为它们确实是合同，在我们和服务提供商之间就产生了法律关系。

So for that reason, consumer contracts, because they are contracts, there's a legal relationship that arises between us and the service providers.

所以它们绝对是合同，但作为消费者，法院给了我们更多的余地，也就是说，企业必须格外透明和公平，尤其是如果有什么特别苛刻的条款。

So they are definitely contracts, but we're given sort of, as consumers, we're given more leeway by the courts in the sense that the businesses have to be extra transparent and fair, especially if there's anything particularly onerous.

而且关于我们到底同意了些什么，总是会有争议，法律也在不断演变。

And there's always going to be an argument, and the law is evolving in this all the time, as to what it is exactly we're agreeing to.

因为如果是两家大企业，比如富时100的公司，它们会有律师团队仔细审查条款和条件。

Because if it's two big businesses, two FTSE 100 companies, they'll have teams of lawyers looking through terms and conditions.

当他们最终达成那份真正仔细阅读和考虑了数月的文件时，然后他们会聚在一起，开一个大型的签署会议。

And when they arrive at the final document that they've actually really properly read and considered over many months, and then they all get together and have a big signing meeting.

然后他们才真正仔细考虑并签署了这些条款。

Then they properly considered and signed up to things.

但这并不意味着他们不会犯错。

It doesn't mean that they don't make mistakes.

但在这种情况下，法院会说，你们是大公司，你们有顾问，如果你们同意了现在不喜欢或认为商业上不利的条款，那只能怪你们自己，这是你们的失误。

But in those instances, the courts will say, You're big companies, you had advisers, and if you've agreed to something you now don't like or you think is commercially unfavourable, well, unlucky, that was your mistake.

但对消费者来说，宽容度要大得多，因为我们在那些匆忙点击的瞬间，身边没有律师给我们建议。

But there's a lot more leniency towards consumers because we don't have the lawyers around to advise us in those split seconds between trying to do things.

所以我认为公司总是会设置条款和条件，尤其是消费者条款，他们应该努力让这些条款尽可能醒目和清晰，因为最终，如果某个消费者提起集体诉讼或监管机构提出质疑，说这不公平且没有充分引起消费者注意，那么这样做会保护他们。

So I think the companies will always put terms and conditions in, as I say, and I think especially if it's consumer terms, they should be making efforts to make them as prominent and as clear because they will ultimately, that will protect them if there's an argument brought by a particular consumer in a class action or by a regulator to say this isn't fair and it wasn't brought properly to the attention of the consumer.

但这是那些灰色地带之一。

But that's one of those grey areas.

只有当消费者提起诉讼，法院做出判决，或者监管机构做出具体声明时，你才能真正知道你是否做得足够，公平地引起了消费者的注意。

You'll only actually know whether you did enough to bring it fairly to the attention of the consumer when a claim is brought before a court and they actually make a judgement on it, or a regulator makes a particular pronouncement.

但在很多时候，人们只是凭直觉，或者在一定程度上凭有依据的直觉，来判断什么最终应该被认为是合理的。

But a lot of the time, people are just going with their instincts or their informed, advised instincts to a certain extent as to what should be considered ultimately reasonable.

那你觉得，从法官的角度来看，是不是总会稍微偏向消费者一点？因为就像你说的，消费者可能没有那种资金支持，也没有那么多知识。

Would you then say there would always be a slight bias towards consumer from a judge's perspective, for example, because, like you said, they might not have that financial backing and that knowledge.

如果是五五开的情况，结果更可能会偏向消费者那边。

If there is a fiftyfifty situation, it's more likely to go and swing in the way of the consumer.

对，绝对是这样，毫无疑问。

Yeah, absolutely, definitely.

而且有一些消费者法律专门针对不公平的合同条款进行保护，甚至在一定程度上，合理性原则也会应用到商业协议中，但确实，消费者得到的保护更多。

And there are consumer laws that specifically seek to protect against unfair contract terms, which even to some extent reasonableness can come into commercial agreements as well, but definitely, yeah, consumers are better protected.

在数字广告领域，从收入和规模来看，主要是谷歌、脸书、亚马逊这些公司在主导。

And in the digital advertising world, in terms of revenue and scale, it's being dominated by the likes of Google, Facebook, Amazon.

他们是不是……

Are they...

你觉得，还是从你的角度来看，他们在承担责任方面做得够不够？不管是隐私问题还是其他方面。

Do you feel, again, in your opinion, do you feel that they're doing enough when it comes to taking that responsibility, whether it's privacy or anything like that?

他们的做法确实已经改变了。

They've definitely changed their practises.

比如说谷歌吧，谷歌会指出现在被起诉的那些做法，他们现在正在等待劳埃德诉谷歌案关于cookies的判决，说那些做法已经改变了，但现在已经不是那样了。

So if it's Google, for instance, Google will point out that the practises which are now being brought, they are now waiting for judgment in the Lloyd and Google case to do with cookies, that those practices have changed, but that's not the case anymore.

脸书自己也进行了改革，他们现在有了监督委员会，相当于自己的最高法院，来处理内容决策之类的事情。

Facebook reforms have been brought in by the company themselves, they've got the oversight board now to be its own Supreme Court over content decisions and things.

所以我觉得这些大型科技公司，他们自己也在努力改变他们的做法。

So I think the big tech companies, they are making efforts themselves to change their ways.

我觉得有一个普遍的主题，尤其是在数字或科技领域，法律是相当保守的，而且总是有点在追赶。

There's a theme, I think, generally, especially in digital anything or technological anything, the law is quite conservative and it's always sort of playing catch up.

你看，这个主题不断出现。

This is the theme, you see, that emerges continually.

总会有新技术、新方法，等到律师或立法者注意到可能有问题，或者它正在以某种方式损害某人的权利和利益时，他们才开始一个相当漫长的过程，试图把这些写进法律。

There are always going to be new technologies, new approaches that by the time the lawyers have sort of it's come to their attention or the lawmakers, it's come to their attention that potentially there's a problem with this or it's acting in a way which is prejudicial to someone's rights and interests, and then they then start quite a long process to try and put things into law.

所以，我们总是有点在追赶。

So, we're always playing catch up a little bit.

我觉得，再看看人工智能，我也可以看到这种情况在一定程度上也会发生。

I think, again, on the horizon looking at artificial intelligence, I can see that being the case as well, to a certain extent.

但是，对，抱歉。

But, yeah, sorry.

不，这确实很有意思，我们知道英国打算从2023年起禁止在线垃圾食品广告。

No, it's definitely interesting, and we know The UK is looking to ban, for example, junk food advertising online from 2023.

你觉得这会怎么影响这些家喻户晓的品牌，他们又有什么替代选择呢？

How do you think that's going to impact these household brands and what are their alternative options?

因为他们真的是被全方位挤压了，不管是在线广告、电视广告，还是其他什么，过了某个时间点，他们的目标受众可能更有可能看他们的广告或者喜欢他们的广告，但都不行了。

Because they must be being squeezed in every shape and form really, you know, if they can't advertise online or TV or whatever it might be after a certain time when their captive audience is probably more likely to be engaging with their ads or appreciating their ads.

他们还有什么别的选择呢？

What's the other alternative for them?

我觉得政府是基于公共健康方面的担忧和游说，认为存在肥胖危机，这是个问题，尤其是年轻人，那些高脂肪、高糖、高盐的食物，以及它们的营销方式，我们都熟悉，比如那些糖果总是放在收银台旁边，人们带着小孩每周购物时，孩子伸手就能拿到，比如士力架。

I think the government has taken the view based on public health concerns and lobbying that there is an obesity crisis, there is a problem, and especially with young people, you know, with these sort of high in fat, sugar and salt foods and the way they've been marketed, you know, we can all relate to all the confectionery things being left near the till area when people are coming through harassed with their weekly shopping in young children and they're reaching for whatever it is, the Mars Bar.

它们总是放在三岁小孩的视线范围内，对吧？

They always seem to be in the eye line of a three year old child, right?

我经常发现，每次逛超市都是这样，所有放在视线和手够不到的地方的东西，看起来很明显，但确实很聪明，对吧，他们设计货架和布局的方式，一切都精心安排好了。

I find that all the time, kind of all going through the supermarket and yeah, everything out of eyesight and reach is just, you know, it seems obvious, but it's it's super smart, right, the way they've thought about their their aisles and the plans and and everything like that, you know, it's all fixated.

而且你想想麦当劳，小时候有麦当劳叔叔，还会办麦当劳派对或者汉堡王派对。

And you you think of McDonald's as a great example, you know, growing up with Ronald McDonald and you'd have your McDonald's parties or your Burger King parties.

那时候就是这样，对吧？

And, you know, that would be the thing, right?

你就会说，妈妈，我能不能办个麦当劳生日派对，邀请我所有的朋友？

You'd be like, oh, mom, can I have a McDonald's birthday party and invite all my friends?

因为朋友圈里其他人也会这么做。

Because everyone else in your friendship circle would do the same.

所以我觉得他们在这方面真的很聪明。

So I think they've been very smart in that sense.

但就像你说的，现在情况不一样了，他们不再这么做了。

But like you said, it's catching up now where they're not doing that.

而且我也发现，不管是工作中还是家里那些现在18岁的年轻人，他们对这些快餐品牌的关注度，不像我们80后、90后小时候那样高了。

And I also do find, know, speaking to whether it's within work or family members that are 18 now, they're kind of not as focused on these fast food brands as maybe we were growing up in the 80s, the 90s.

我觉得没错。

I think that's right.

在这个背景下，一个要抛给政府的大问题是：如果我们这样做，会不会有什么不同？我觉得现实是会有影响的，因为一方面，公司可能会说，这是一种限制，它真的有效吗？

And a big question which is going to be put to the government in this context is, well, is it going to make any difference if we put this and I think the reality is that it will, because on one hand, the companies may say, well, it's a restriction and is it going to be effective?

我猜很可能会有影响。

I suspect it probably will.

当然，拿烟草广告来说，英国和欧洲已经禁止烟草广告和赞助很多年了，传统可燃烟草产品的消费率确实在下降，这里说的是那些传统产品，不包括新型的电子烟产品。

Certainly, taking the example of tobacco advertising, has been banned in The UK and Europe a number of years in sponsorship, and consumption rates of the traditional combustible tobacco products, so leaving aside the newer ones, the vaping ones, have definitely been reducing.

你刚才也问到，这是不是唯一的方法，或者除了禁止之外还有其他办法吗？

You were asking as well about is that the only way or are there other ways other than seeking to ban?

我觉得还有公共卫生教育宣传，这在控烟方面也起了作用，甚至烟草公司也承认这一点，看看烟盒上的警告，越来越严重，特别是拿烟草来说，上面印着病变的器官，实际上，那上面唯一的品牌标识就是健康警告和病变器官的图片。

I think there's public health education campaigns, and that certainly was a factor as well with smoking, and even from tobacco companies saying that this isn't and looking at the warnings on packs and increasingly, especially taking the tobacco example, diseased organs, and in fact, that being the only branding there is, it's a health warning and a sort of diseased organ.

英国计划从2023年起禁止在线垃圾食品广告。

The UK is looking to ban junk food advertising online from 2023.

那么约翰，你觉得这会对家喻户晓的品牌产生什么影响？有没有其他的替代方案？

So John, how do you think this is going to impact household brands and are there any alternative options?

这些知名品牌肯定会对此感到担忧。

The household brands will be concerned about this.

没有人喜欢自己的广告权利和自由竞争权利受到影响，但众所周知，高脂肪、高糖和高盐的食物是有争议的。

Nobody likes to have their advertising rights, their rights to free competition impacted, but as we know, foods high in fat, sugar and salt, they're controversial.

现在存在肥胖危机，尤其是在年轻人当中。

There is an obesity crisis, especially amongst the young.

所以，我觉得这大概是不可避免的。

So, I think it's, you know, I suppose it was inevitable.

这是继多年前对烟草等其他有争议产品实施限制之后的又一项举措。

It follows in the trend on the back of restrictions that were brought in for other controversial products, in particular tobacco products from many years ago.

对于你的问题，答案是有的，确实有替代方案。

There are, in answer to your question, there are alternatives.

公共卫生教育是另一种重要的方式，试图解决这个健康问题，但我认为，和烟草以及其他有争议的产品如酒精一样，实际上是监管措施（比如促销限制和年龄限制等）与公共卫生宣传相结合。

There's public health education, which is another big way to try and impact on that health problem, but I think similar to tobacco and other controversial products like alcohol, it's actually a combination of some regulation around promotion and age restrictions, etcetera, and the public health campaign.

是的，我认为如果我们看看烟草的例子，毫无疑问，传统烟草产品的消费率多年来已经下降，所以先不提现代电子烟产品，我预计这些将被禁的所谓快餐食品的消费率也会出现类似的下降。

So, yeah, and I think if we look at the example of tobacco, there's no question that consumption rates have reduced over the years in those traditional products, so leaving aside the modern sort of vaping products, and I would expect to see the similar reduction in consumption rates for the foods, know, generally being described as fast foods, that are going to be the subject of these bans.

那么，你觉得我们以后都会变得健康吗？

So we'll all be healthy moving forward then, you think?

特别是我们的孩子，还有孩子的孩子，你觉得如果他们不接触快餐广告，比如麦当劳、唐恩都乐的广告，还有那些看起来很好吃的汉堡，其实我们都知道广告里的汉堡都是假的、塑料做的。

Especially our children and our children's children, you think if they're not being exposed to fast food advertising, Ronald McDonald, Donald's ads, and all these lovely looking burgers, which we all know are fake and plastic burgers on the screens in the adverts.

如果他们不接触这些，那我们从现在起肯定都会很健康了。

Know, if they're not exposed to that, then surely we'll all be healthy from now on.

是的，我觉得这就是目标。

It's, yeah, it's a nice I think that that is the aim.

而且总会有争论。

I mean, and there'll always be arguments.

总会有人说，这种广告限制真的有用吗？

There'll always be people who will say, well, you know, is that advertising restriction?

它能不能达到预期的效果？

Is that going to have the desired effects, or not?

但我觉得，一个有点肤浅但很常识性的回答是，如果这不会造成什么大影响，而且对所有市场参与者都一样，那行业为什么还要担心呢？

But I think it's a sort of, well, a slightly superficial but common sense response is if it wasn't going to be a big deal and to the extent that it affects all market participants in the same way, why would the industry be concerned about it?

所以，我觉得说这会对消费产生影响，大概是合理的。

So, I think it's probably fair to say that there will be an effect on consumption.

具体是多少，或者多快？

How much exactly or how quickly?

这个预测起来可能有点难。

That could have been a bit more difficult to try and predict.

这些快餐品牌在广告里展示那些看起来完美的汉堡，如果实际产品不是那样的话，他们允许这么做吗？

Are these fast food brands allowed to show on their adverts these perfect looking burgers if the actual end product doesn't look the same?

我看过一些纪录片，里面显示用的不是真奶酪，也不是真汉堡，都是喷上去的，就是为了看起来比实际好很多。

I've seen a few documentaries that show it's not real cheese being used, it's not real burgers, it's being sprayed on, etcetera, just to look a lot better than it really is.

这不是误导消费者，让他们以为实际产品就是那样吗？

Isn't that misleading the consumer in thinking that their end product looks like that?

如果是这样，他们怎么还能逍遥法外？

And if so, how are they getting away with it?

有一般的消费者保护法，不一定是专门针对广告的，但确实有关于不公平交易的法律，其中就包括任何商家以误导方式展示产品，试图欺骗我们，让我们相信会得到实际上得不到的东西。

There are general, not necessarily advertising specific, but there are general consumer protection laws, again, against unfair trading, and part of that would be any trader that's presenting their products in a misleading way to try and deceive us and, you know, encourage us to believe we're going to get something that we're not.

我不具体评论任何人的产品是否名副其实，但我可以说，在一般层面上，如果人们怀疑产品名不副实，那么有消费者保护法，特别是贸易标准局这样的机构，负责追究这些企业的责任。

You know, I won't comment specifically on anyone's products to say whether they are what they claim to be or not, but I can say at that general level that if people are suspicious that they're not what they are purporting to be, then there are consumer protection laws there and the authorities, the trading standards authorities in particular, who are there to hold those businesses to account.

我觉得这可能挺难的，因为视觉上呈现的东西比较模糊。

I suppose it can be quite difficult because what is being represented visually is vague.

它并没有说这是百分百的切达奶酪，只是展示了一张图片。

It's not saying this is 100% cheddar cheese, it's showing a picture.

然后就像我们律师常做的那样，你会陷入那些灰色地带，争论这到底在传达什么。

I suppose then you get into that, as we always do as lawyers, you get into those grey areas of arguing, well, what is that communicating?

有人说，这明显是在告诉我那是真奶酪。

And one person says, well, it's definitely telling me that's real cheese.

另一个人说，我不确定，也许它没有声称这是最好的品质，但确实把它展示成奶酪了。

Another person says, well, I don't know, maybe it's not claiming that it's the best quality, but it's definitely showing it as cheese.

然后就会遇到一个问题：什么是奶酪？

Then you get into a question, what is cheese?

律师们会去研究奶酪的确切定义，我想那会是一个相当详细的定义，涉及乳制品的含量、牛奶等等。

And lawyers will get into the definition of what cheese actually means, and it will have quite a detailed definition, I suppose, of levels of dairy product and milk, etc.

所以这类调查和问题，只有在有人提出质疑时，才会真正得到认真对待。

So those sorts of investigations and questions only really get properly considered when someone challenges something.

如果涉事企业要么接受并改变做法，要么提出异议，那就得提交法院进行全面审理。

If the business in question either accepts it and changes their practices or they dispute it, and then it's got to go before a full consideration before a court.

我觉得最早的那些纪录片里有一部，约翰，不知道你看过没有，是不是《超码的我》？

I think that one of the first documentaries that was out, I'm not sure, John, if you've seen it or not, was it Supersize Me?

我想我看过《Britsdale》。

think I've seen Britsdale.

没看过。

Haven't watched it.

对，对，就是一个人，一夜之间，你知道的。

Yeah, yeah, and it was, I think, just just it's a guy who's overnight.

显然，他一夜成名了。

Obviously, he got overnight fame.

他挑战了麦当劳，麦当劳当时声称，具体我不太清楚，但大意是说你可以一日三餐都吃麦当劳。

And he he challenged McDonald's, which stated, obviously, I don't know exactly what they stated, but it was on the lines of, you know, you can have McDonald's breakfast, lunch and dinner.

而且这样你就能满足所有营养、维生素等方面的需求。

And it's, you know, you've ticked all your boxes in terms of nutrition, vitamins, etc.

他挑战了这个说法。

And he challenged that.

我记得没过几周，甚至可能没几天。

And I think a few, I think it wasn't even a few weeks.

好像就几天时间。

I think it was a few days in.

他就一直这么吃。

That's what he was having.

所以他每顿都去麦当劳，而且是在美国，那边的份量比英国大得多。

So he was going McDonald's and every time, and this was in The States and their portion sizes are much bigger than The UK.

我记得他点餐的时候，如果服务员问要不要超大份，

I think someone that, you know, when he was being served, if they asked, do want it supersized?

他必须得说好。

He'd have to say yes.

他得喝多少次超大杯可乐啊，想想那糖分摄入量，简直离谱。

And the amount of times he had to have a, you know, an extra, extra large Coke or, you know, you just think of the sugar intake that you would have had is ridiculous.

所以那是我记得最早出来的纪录片之一，他挑战了那个。

So that was what I remember one of the first documentaries that came out and he challenged that.

几天后，医生直接跟他说，你不能那样做。

After a few days, the doctors simply said to him, you can't do that.

你不能继续了。

You can't carry on.

否则你会死的。

Otherwise you will die.

就这么简单。

It's as simple as that really.

我觉得那真的让很多人有点醒悟了。

I think that really everyone woke up a little bit.

我觉得作为消费者，看了那样的节目以及之后类似的节目，会让你思考，有些东西你需要均衡饮食，某样东西吃太多并不好。

I think as a consumer after a show like that and shows that followed that because it made you think, you know, there are some elements and you need to have a balanced diet and too much of one thing isn't so good.

你可以吃麦当劳，但不要一日三餐都吃它。

You have the McDonald's but don't have it every three meals a day.

所以像这样的纪录片确实帮助教育了消费者，让他们知道什么该做、什么不该做。

So I documentaries like that have helped in educating the consumer in what you should and shouldn't be doing.

而且，我觉得像麦当劳这样的企业，因为担心，我想一方面，他们会说我们绝不会鼓励顾客三餐都在我们这里吃，尽管作为企业，从商业角度来说，他们可能还挺乐意看到这种情况发生的。

And also, think the businesses like McDonald's and they, because of the concern, I suppose in one way, they would say we would never promote someone to have all their meals with us, although as a business, presumably they'd be quite happy on one level, on a commercial level, for that to happen.

而且我想他们也试图改变菜单，推出更健康的选择。

And I suppose they try to change the menus and they try to introduce healthier options.

这些都是企业必须考虑的事情，当然，还要不断进化。

These are all the considerations that the businesses have to make, and of course, evolve.

所以，很多年前，他们在儿童派对和开心乐园餐等方面的促销力度确实更大，而我很久没吃过开心乐园餐了。

So, years ago, they did have much higher levels of promotion with the children's parties and the Happy Meals and things, and it's been a long time since I've had a Happy Meal.

我小时候还没有这些，因为那太久了，而且我的孩子现在都成年了，所以我买开心乐园餐也是很久以前的事了，但我想他们现在已经意识到，因为附赠玩具、试图培养孩子们对这个品牌的忠诚度，他们会受到批评。

They weren't around when I was a child because it was so long ago, and my children are all adult now, so it was a long time ago since I was buying any Happy Meals, but I think they have now been aware that they are subject to criticism for having the toys and trying to encourage children to be loyal to that brand.

当然，如果孩子们真的因此成为忠实消费者，每天都去那里吃，那对他们可不好。

And of course, if they are, and they were going to grow up to be such loyal consumers that they're eating it there every day, it's not going to be good for them.

所以他们确实需要承担责任，如果健康监管部门不管，他们可能面临我们之前谈到的集体诉讼，那些觉得自己被误导、被鼓励养成不良饮食习惯的群体可能会提起诉讼。

So they do have to take responsibility and if it's not through the particular health authorities, they potentially have, as we talked previously about class action potential claims that could be brought on behalf of groups that feel that they have been misled and sort of encouraged to adopt these really bad dietary habits.

有意思的是，看完那个节目之后，我反而更想去点麦当劳了，因为我看到他们在美国有那么多选择，我就想，为什么英国没有这些呢？

Oddly enough, after the show, I think I was more inclined to order a McDonald's because I saw the range that they had in The US and I was thinking, why is that not available in The UK?

但你知道吗，这点上他们做得还挺好的。

But you know what, fair to them.

我觉得很多品牌因为糟糕的公关、诉讼或者纪录片之类的，都不得不妥协了。

I think a lot of brands have caved in with such disastrous PR or claims and documentaries, etcetera.

但我觉得也有很多品牌是主动站出来说，你知道吗，我们需要做一些小改变，这里那里调整一下。

But I think there's a lot of brands that have kind of been hands up and said, you know what, we need to change little things and make certain tweaks here and there.

而且我觉得对于快餐店来说，关键就是选择，或者说有选择。

And I think with fast food restaurants, I think the keyword here is options, or, you know, there is an option.

你可以配薯条，也可以配沙拉或者胡萝卜条，如果是开心乐园餐的话。

You can have fries with your meal or you can have salad or carrot sticks if it's a happy meal.

所以我觉得提供这些选择，就能让他们说，看，你自己决定，这是你的选择。

So I think me giving those options, which I think, you know, which enables them to say, look, it's up to you, it's your decision.

我们有各种各样的东西，不会强迫你选这个或那个。

We've got all of these different things available and we're not kind of forcing you in one way or another.

对，就是负责任的风险管理。

Yeah, responsible sort of risk management.

没错。

Exactly.

说到这个，我有个关于环保和可持续发展的问题。

And on that, I've got a question around being green and sustainability.

你觉得我们现在是不是处在一个关键时期？

Do you think we're in an era now, aren't we?

我觉得我们确实到了一个焦点时刻，越来越多的车变成电动车，大家都在关注自己的碳足迹和对世界的影响。

I think we're at quite a focal point really, where more and more cars are becoming more electric, everyone's looking at their carbon footprint and the impact that they're having on the world.

现在有很多科技公司，或者有很多回馈社会的方式，比如社会责任或环境责任。

And there's tons of tech companies or there's ways of giving back now that social responsibility or environmental responsibility.

你觉得公司是真的出于良心在做这些事吗？

Do you think companies are genuinely doing it out of their own, you know, the way their conscience?

还是说他们只是在跟风？

Or is it a case where they're just jumping on a bandwagon?

你怎么看这个问题？

What's your opinion on that?

我觉得，我不想太愤世嫉俗，但可能大多数公司都是由他们的营销人员主导的，再说也不是对营销人员不公平，他们是被那种想要出去卖产品的欲望所驱使的。

I think I would say, not wanting to be too cynical, that probably the majority of companies are seen led by their marketing people, again, not to be unfair to marketing people, led by that desire to get out and sell their products.

如果他们看到，而且他们确实看到了，这是一个事实，可持续性非常重要，尤其对年轻一代来说非常重要。

If they see, as they do see and this is a fact, that sustainability is really important and really important to younger generations in particular.

当然，如果某件事对某人很重要，营销人员就会想，好，我得抓住这一点，我得迎合这一点，我得吸引他们。

And of course, if something's important to someone, the marketeer's mind is, right, I've got to tap into that and I've got to play to that and I've got to hook.

他们就是营销界的钓鱼人。

They're the marketing fisher people.

他们得利用人们特别关心和感兴趣的东西来吸引他们。

They've to hook the people on the back of that, whatever's particularly concerning them and interest.

我觉得在可持续性和ESG方面，这绝对是一个例子。

I think definitely with sustainability and ESG, that is one.

因此就出现了“漂绿”这个概念，公司被指责只是做出各种误导性的声明。

And this concept of greenwashing has arisen as a result, where companies are being accused of just making various claims that are misleading.

举个例子，误导性的环保声明可能是说我们的产品不含某种物质，或者我们的产品百分之百不含氟利昂，但实际上，这些本来就是必须做到的。

To give an example of sort of misleading environmental claims, it could be saying our product doesn't have or our product's 100% CFC free, when in fact, it needs to be that anyway.

所以他们是在拿一个本来就不允许含有的东西来做宣传。

So they're promoting it on the basis of something that it's not allowed to have anyway.

但这其实是在利用人们对绿色和可持续发展的渴望，以一种不公平、误导的方式。

But it's sort of playing on this unfairly, in a misleading way, on this desire to be green and sustainable.

如果他们误导了消费者，那么根据特定的环境法规，以及一般的消费者保护措施，他们可能会受到质疑，因为这些规定要求不能误导消费者购买产品。

And to the extent that they are misleading the consumers, then they can be challenged for that under specific environmental rules, but also under general consumer protection measures that provide that you can't mislead consumers to buy your products.

对，我觉得这很重要，我们每个人都有责任，而且我认为公司在这方面确实走在了前面。

Yeah, think it's important and I think we've all really got our part to play and I think companies are really leading the way here.

我只能根据我在Seedtag的第一次经历来说，我们在这里做的事情，就是做一些小小的改变。

I can only, Given my first time experience of Seedtag and what we're doing here, so just making slight changes.

我们会重复使用笔记本电脑，如果有旧电脑，我们会确保捐赠出去，还会回收旧手机。

What we do is we reuse laptops, so if we've got old laptops, we'll make sure we're giving them or donating them and handing in old phones.

最近在Seedtag，我们有一个倡议，为公司里的每个人种一棵树，所以总共种了超过200棵树。

More recently at Seedtag, we had an initiative where a tree was planted on behalf of everyone at the company, so over 200 trees were planted.

所以我觉得，从企业层面来说，每个公司都有责任，但作为个人，我们也得时刻想着这件事。

So I think corporately, everyone, the companies have responsibility, but also as individuals, we need to make sure that we're thinking about it as well.

我们代表的是我们工作的公司，但我们在外面也代表着自己。

We're representing a company that we work for, but we're also representing ourselves when we're out in the world.

所以，是的，我觉得只要我们都在尽自己的一份力，做到最好，那才是最重要的。

So, yeah, I think as long as we're all chipping in and doing our best, then I think that's the most important thing.

而且，我觉得如果从积极的角度来看，即使有些公司可能提出的说法没有完全得到环境科学的证实或支持，但至少人们开始关注环保了，我不想说‘漂绿’是好事，但可持续性被提上议程，人们意识到它，企业也意识到它，并想借此来推销产品，这总归是好的。

And also, I suppose if you take a generally positive view of it, even the companies that maybe are making claims that are not completely substantiated or backed up by all the environmental science, but it's good at least that people are well, I don't want to say it's good that people are greenwashing, but it's good sustainability is on the agenda to the extent that people are aware of it and businesses are aware of it and want to sell on the back of it.

只是需要好好监管，确保他们是在负责任地、公平地、准确地推销。

It's just that they will have to be policed properly to make sure that they are selling it responsibly and fairly and accurately.

就是这样。

That's the thing.

确实。

Definitely.

最后再问你一个问题。

A final question for you.

你觉得数字广告行业的监管未来会怎样发展？

What do you think is the future for regulation in the digital advertising industry?

你提到了人工智能。

You mentioned AI.

你觉得这个行业会朝那个方向发展吗？

Is that where you feel that the industry is going?

还是说，对于监管的未来，还有其他值得考虑的方向？

Or, you know, are there any other ways to think about the future for regulation?

我觉得更多的监管肯定是……

I think more more regulation is definitely...

这倒是能让我保住饭碗。

That sort of serves me Keep

让你有活干嘛。

you in the job then.

我也这么觉得。

I'd say.

对我这个监管律师来说，确实很有用。

Serves me well as a

监管

regulatory

律师。

lawyer.

但是，是的，我觉得未来会有更多监管，因为人类天生就有创新精神，我们一直在想新点子，创造新东西。

But, yeah, no, I think there's gonna be more because, you know, human beings, we're we're innovative and we're chain...

我们一直在思考，很有创造力，总是能想出新的东西。

You know, we're we're thinking of things, we're creative, we're thinking of things all the time.

我觉得一切都在不断向前发展。

And I'd say it's all kind of moving along.

而且，就像我刚才说的，光是试着搞定技术来上这个播客就够费劲的了，律师们可不是最懂技术的人。

And definitely, as I demonstrated, just even trying to negotiate the technology to get on this podcast, lawyers aren't the most technically adept.

正因为如此，创意产业加上技术和数字广告，总是会比律师和立法者领先一步，因为他们一直在创造，不可避免地会发现一些行为不合规或者对人不公平的情况。

And because of that, the creative industries and combined with technology and digital advertising will be always a few steps ahead of the lawyers and the lawmakers because they're creating and inevitably, certain things are going to be discovered that are not acting as they should or acting in an unfair way towards people.

所以结果就是，律师们会说，好吧，我们得管管这事儿了。

And as a consequence, the lawyers are going to say, right, we've got to do something about this.

但可能还是会落后几年。

But there'll be a few years behind, probably.

而人工智能绝对是一个我觉得……我不知道它已经在多大程度上被用于可能相当有争议的方式，但好的一面是，至少在欧盟层面，我认为非常注重保护个人及其权利，我当然希望并期待英国会大体上继续遵循欧盟出台的良好监管。

And AI is definitely one that I think I don't know the extent to which it's already being used potentially in quite controversial ways, but what's good is that and certainly at the EU level, I think there is this very strong focus on protecting individuals and their rights, and I certainly hope and expect that The UK will continue along the lines broadly of falling in line with good regulation that continues to come out of the EU.

所以这就是我看到的未来，会有更多监管，但这是好事，是为了保护我们所有消费者。

So that's how I see a future with more regulation in it, but in a good way to protect us all as consumers.

我觉得能听到不同的视角真的很有意思。

I think it's been really interesting to get a different perspective.

就像我提到的，在我们的日常工作中，我们并没有，而且可能应该更多地讨论这个话题。

As I mentioned, in our day to day, we're not, and we probably should be talking about it a lot more.

作为行业里的营销人员。

As marketers in the industry.

我们应该更详细地讨论监管，关注更大的图景，而不仅仅是我们在做的那些活动、创意和媒体投放。

We should be talking about regulation in greater detail and the bigger picture rather than just the activations, the creative, the media that we run across.

约翰，今天谢谢你的时间。

Thank you, John, for your time today.

谢谢你的邀请。

Thanks for having me.

感谢大家的收听，希望你们喜欢这期《AdTech Heroes》节目。

Thank you for listening, and we hope you enjoyed this episode of AdTech Heroes.

如果你喜欢这期节目，请给我们留下五星好评。

If you enjoyed the show, please leave us a five star review.

想查看本期节目提到的所有笔记和资源，请访问 adtechheroespodcast.com。

To see all the show notes and resources mentioned in this episode, head over to adtechheroespodcast.com.

本期节目由 Seedtag 赞助播出，Seedtag 是全球领先的上下文广告公司。

This episode is brought to you by Seedtag, the world's leading contextual advertising company.

通过上下文智能，你可以在无 Cookie 的基础上，在消费者的兴趣领域内与他们互动。

Contextual intelligence allows you to engage with consumers within their universe of interest on a cookie free basis.

通过将广告融入内容，我们能够更快地吸引用户的注意力，并保持更长时间的关注。

By delivering ads into content, we capture users' attention faster and retain it longer.