In a significant development that affects website operators worldwide, Microsoft Clarity and OneTrust have independently announced substantial changes to their consent management approaches this December, marking a departure from established practices in digital analytics and privacy compliance.
According to an official email sent by OneTrust on December 17, 2024, the company plans to discontinue its existing cookie licenses, which were previously priced per domain. The new pricing model will be based on the amount of processed data required, as confirmed in a communication from Nicky Kyyan, CIPP/E, CIPM, at OneTrust.
The announcement arrives just as Microsoft Clarity introduces its own modifications to consent management. According to digital analytics professionals discussing the changes on LinkedIn, Clarity now mandates the use of its Consent API for determining cookie placement, even in cases where analytics cookies are not placed before user consent.
The Microsoft Clarity update introduces a significant technical requirement for website operators. According to Himanshu Sharma, a tracking implementation specialist, Clarity now requires an active call to their Consent API to verify compliance before enabling tracking features such as session recordings and funnel tracking.
This technical modification represents a departure from the traditional approach where third-party consent management platforms (CMPs) handled consent signals centrally. The new implementation requires additional API calls specifically for Clarity's services, potentially complicating existing consent management workflows.
The implications of these changes extend beyond mere technical modifications. According to discussions among digital analytics professionals on LinkedIn, website operators may face several challenges:
- Implementation Complexity: Websites must now maintain separate API calls for Clarity's consent verification, adding an additional layer of technical complexity.
- Resource Requirements: The changes necessitate development resources to modify existing consent management implementations.
- Operational Concerns: Without proper implementation of the Clarity Consent API, websites risk having their tracking features blocked, potentially affecting analytics capabilities.
Digital analytics professionals have expressed concerns about the broader implications of these changes. Steven Garrett, Enterprise Sales at Station10, noted that during proof of concept testing with alternative solutions, implementation complexities led to abandoned migration attempts.
Stefan H., a Senior Engineer at Croud, raised questions about OneTrust's new requirements, specifically regarding the necessity of providing proprietary GA4 data for continued functionality of consent banners.
Industry professionals highlight potential systematic issues if this approach becomes widespread. According to technical discussions on LinkedIn, if multiple analytics and tracking tools implement similar requirements, websites might need to manage numerous independent consent API calls, potentially creating:
- Multiple parallel consent verification systems
- Increased technical overhead
- Complex maintenance requirements
- Potential performance impacts
The announcements have prompted discussions about alternative solutions. Consentmanager.net has introduced a "Compatibility Mode" feature, specifically designed to facilitate transitions between different CMP providers. This development suggests market adaptation to the changing landscape of consent management.
For website operators using Microsoft Clarity, the new implementation requires:
- Active integration with Clarity's Consent API
- Modification of existing consent management workflows
- Additional verification steps before enabling tracking features
- Potential changes to data collection processes
Similarly, OneTrust's new model requires:
- Reporting of Daily Active Users from GA4
- Migration to a new licensing structure
- Integration with expanded consent solutions, including Mobile Consent and CTV consent capabilities
The changes announced by both companies signal a potential shift in how consent management might evolve. Industry professionals express concern about the possibility of other analytics providers implementing similar requirements, which could lead to increased complexity in consent management implementations.
According to technical discussions, this could create scenarios where websites need to maintain multiple consent verification systems, potentially complicating the currently centralized approach to consent management.
Companies are already developing solutions to address these changes. According to LinkedIn discussions, several consent management providers are introducing features specifically designed to ease transitions between different CMP systems, indicating market adaptation to the evolving landscape.
The technical community continues to monitor these developments, with ongoing discussions about potential implications for website operations, user privacy, and compliance requirements. These changes mark a significant shift in how websites must handle user consent for analytics and tracking functionalities, with broader implications for the digital analytics industry.