A note for risk managers and general counsel

The illusion of choice.

A visitor arrives at your website. A banner offers them a choice: accept, or reject. They click "Reject" and believe the matter is settled. The question regulators are now asking, and plaintiffs' counsel after them, is whether the data had already left the building.

What actually happens on a typical page load

  1. 0 ms

    Page requested

  2. ~120 ms

    Third-party trackers fire

    Pixels and cookies load; data may already flow to ad networks

  3. ~800 ms

    Consent banner renders

    The visitor is offered a choice, after the fact

  4. +4 s

    Visitor clicks "Reject"

  5. after

    Tracking continues

    Misconfigured tags ignore the rejection

Everything to the left of the banner happened before anyone could choose. That is the "illusion of choice", and it is visible from outside your organisation.

See for yourself

Does your website keep its promises?

Enter your address. The result appears on screen; a fuller audit covering Value, Risk and AI Readiness can follow by email within 48 hours.

Run the check at aaanow.ai/confirm

Enforcement examples · 2025

One recurring failure: the visitor's choice never took effect.

Concentric three-quarter donut rings, ring length scaled to penalty amount: Healthline 1.55 million dollars, Tractor Supply 1.35 million dollars, Condé Nast 750,000 euros, American Honda 632,500 dollars, Todd Snyder 345,178 dollars.

Consent-failure penalties

Ring length scaled to penalty · 2025

Healthline · California AG

banner failed to disable tracking cookies

$1.55M

Tractor Supply · California

opt-outs never reached third-party trackers

$1.35M

Condé Nast · CNIL

cookies without consent; CIPA class action proceeding

€750K

American Honda · CPPA

opting out took several steps, opting in took one

$632.5K

Todd Snyder · CPPA

consent platform silently broken for 40 days

$345.2K

Consent-failure penalties, 2025
CompanyAuthorityFailurePenalty
Healthline MediaCalifornia Attorney General, July 2025Banner failed to disable tracking cookies$1,550,000
Tractor SupplyCalifornia, October 2025Opt-outs never reached third-party trackers$1,350,000
Condé NastCNIL, November 2025Cookies without consent; CIPA class action proceeding in California€750,000
American HondaCPPA, March 2025Opting out took several steps, opting in took one$632,500
Todd SnyderCPPA, May 2025Consent platform silently broken for 40 days$345,178
SHEINCNIL, September 2025Cookies still placed after visitors refused them€150,000,000
CNIL, Commission Nationale de l'Informatique et des Libertés

CNIL · SHEIN · September 2025

€150,000,000

For cookie failures, including cookies still being placed after visitors refused them. Nearly one hundred times the largest US penalty of the year.

Enforcement of consent is no longer theoretical, on either side of the Atlantic.

Colorado, Connecticut and California attorneys general have announced a joint investigation into whether universal opt-out signals are honoured. These are a limited number of examples to illustrate the national regularity infringement being pursued by regulators. Sources: itemized and listed below.

Your contacts at Wilson Elser

The check is automated. The judgment is human.

Adam and Jana lead Wilson Elser's work where privacy, data use and AI governance meet: cookie and tracking compliance, consent programs that hold up under scrutiny, and the defense of privacy litigation nationwide.

If your result raises questions, they are the right first call.

Adam R. Bialek

Partner · New York, NY

Co-chair of the Intellectual Property and Technology Practice. Counsels on internet law, digital compliance, data security and website accessibility.

Portrait of Adam R. Bialek

Jana S. Farmer

Partner · White Plains, NY

A leader of the Privacy, Security and AI practice (CIPP/US, AIGP, FIP). Advises on cookie and tracking compliance, consent and AI governance, and defends privacy claims.

Portrait of Jana S. Farmer

The paper

Download "The Illusion of Choice"

US State Privacy Laws: Targeted Advertising and Profiling Opt-Out Rights (2026). The whitepaper behind this page: the enforcement record, the state-by-state opt-out landscape, and what honouring choice means in practice.

Download the paper , US State Privacy Laws: Targeted Advertising and Profiling Opt-Out Rights 2026, (PDF)

Privacy monitoring · AAANOW

One check is a snapshot. Monitoring keeps it that way.

Websites change every week: new tags, new vendors, new pages. AAANOW's privacy monitoring keeps watching after today's check, so a compliant site stays a compliant site.

01

Your continuous weekly audit

Your site is audited every week, the same outside-in review as the check above: what loads before consent, and what happens after "Reject".

02

Alerts when it matters

An alert against significant changes: a privacy link failure, tracking appearing before consent, or anything that impacts regulatory matters.

03

A weekly report

A weekly report to your inbox: your current grade, what changed since last week, and what needs attention first.

Ask about privacy monitoring →

References

Sources used on this page.

The statutes, regulator resources and reporting behind the figures and examples above.

Attorney Advertising: prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. This page is an introduction and a starting point only; it is not legal advice. The automated review is operated by AAAnow.ai Ltd ("AAANOW") and reflects publicly available areas of a website at a point in time. Where matters of legal compliance are concerned, always take advice from appropriately qualified counsel.