Samsung TVs: Difference between revisions
SinexTitan (talk | contribs) modest refinements |
→References: Archive |
||
| Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
{{DISPLAYTITLE:Samsung TVs}} | {{DISPLAYTITLE:Samsung TVs}} | ||
'''[[Samsung]] TVs''' have been the subject of multiple lawsuits, regulatory complaints, & consumer backlash over data collection practices, benchmark manipulation, & post-purchase advertising. In December 2025, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued Samsung & four other TV manufacturers, alleging their smart TVs collected detailed viewing data without consumers' knowledge or consent.<ref name="therecord-acr-lawsuit">{{Cite web |title=Texas sues 5 smart TV manufacturers over data collection practices |url=https://therecord.media/texas-sues-5-smart-tv-makers-over-acr-tech | | '''[[Samsung]] TVs''' have been the subject of multiple lawsuits, regulatory complaints, & consumer backlash over data collection practices, benchmark manipulation, & post-purchase advertising. In December 2025, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued Samsung & four other TV manufacturers, alleging their smart TVs collected detailed viewing data without consumers' knowledge or consent.<ref name="therecord-acr-lawsuit">{{Cite web |title=Texas sues 5 smart TV manufacturers over data collection practices |url=https://therecord.media/texas-sues-5-smart-tv-makers-over-acr-tech |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260117140238/https://therecord.media/texas-sues-5-smart-tv-makers-over-acr-tech |archive-date=2026-01-17 |access-date=2026-04-04 |website=The Record}}</ref> Samsung settled in February 2026, agreeing to halt data collection without express consent.<ref name="therecord-samsung-settlement">{{Cite web |title=Samsung updates ACR privacy practices after Texas sues TV manufacturers |url=https://therecord.media/samsung-updates-acr-privacy-practices-texas |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260312075740/https://therecord.media/samsung-updates-acr-privacy-practices-texas |archive-date=2026-03-12 |access-date=2026-04-04 |website=The Record}}</ref> | ||
==Incidents== | ==Incidents== | ||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
{{Main|Texas Attorney General sues multiple TV makers over ACR user data collection}} | {{Main|Texas Attorney General sues multiple TV makers over ACR user data collection}} | ||
Samsung smart TVs use {{Wplink|automatic content recognition}} (ACR), which Samsung brands as "Viewing Information Services." According to the Texas AG's petition, the technology captures screenshots of the TV display every 500 milliseconds, regardless of the content source.<ref name="petition-samsung">{{Cite web |date=December 15, 2025 |title=State of Texas v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Original Petition |url=https://texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/images/press/Samsung%20TV%20Petition%20Filed.pdf | | Samsung smart TVs use {{Wplink|automatic content recognition}} (ACR), which Samsung brands as "Viewing Information Services." According to the Texas AG's petition, the technology captures screenshots of the TV display every 500 milliseconds, regardless of the content source.<ref name="petition-samsung">{{Cite web |date=December 15, 2025 |title=State of Texas v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Original Petition |url=https://texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/images/press/Samsung%20TV%20Petition%20Filed.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260318010130if_/https://texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/images/press/Samsung%20TV%20Petition%20Filed.pdf |archive-date=2026-03-18 |access-date=2026-04-04 |publisher=Office of the Texas Attorney General |format=PDF}}</ref> ACR doesn't just track Samsung apps. It also captures content routed through HDMI ports from cable boxes, game consoles, DVD players, & devices casting via Apple AirPlay.<ref name="petition-samsung" /><ref name="therecord-acr-lawsuit" /> | ||
On 15 December 2025, Paxton filed separate lawsuits against Samsung, [[Sony]], [[LG]], [[Hisense]], & {{wplink|TCL Technology}} under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA).<ref name="therecord-acr-lawsuit" /><ref name="iapp-acr">{{Cite web |title=Automated content recognition technology takes privacy enforcement spotlight |url=https://iapp.org/news/a/automated-content-recognition-technology-takes-privacy-enforcement-spotlight | | On 15 December 2025, Paxton filed separate lawsuits against Samsung, [[Sony]], [[LG]], [[Hisense]], & {{wplink|TCL Technology}} under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA).<ref name="therecord-acr-lawsuit" /><ref name="iapp-acr">{{Cite web |title=Automated content recognition technology takes privacy enforcement spotlight |url=https://iapp.org/news/a/automated-content-recognition-technology-takes-privacy-enforcement-spotlight |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260217004853/https://iapp.org/news/a/automated-content-recognition-technology-takes-privacy-enforcement-spotlight |archive-date=2026-02-17 |access-date=2026-04-04 |website=IAPP}}</ref> The Texas AG alleged that Samsung used dark patterns to prevent consumers from opting out, requiring consumers to navigate buried settings menus to disable data collection that took a single click to enable during setup.<ref name="petition-samsung" /><ref name="privacyguides-settlement">{{Cite web |date=2026-03-02 |title=Samsung Forced to Halt Data Collection in TVs in Texas Without "Express Consent" |url=https://www.privacyguides.org/news/2026/03/02/samsung-forced-to-halt-data-collection-in-tvs-in-texas-without-express-consent/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260312015505/https://www.privacyguides.org/news/2026/03/02/samsung-forced-to-halt-data-collection-in-tvs-in-texas-without-express-consent/ |archive-date=2026-03-12 |access-date=2026-04-04 |website=Privacy Guides}}</ref> | ||
Samsung became the first of the five manufacturers to settle, on 26 February 2026.<ref name="therecord-samsung-settlement" /> The settlement required Samsung to halt all ACR data collection without express consent & rewrite its consent screens to be "clear and conspicuous."<ref name="therecord-samsung-settlement" /> Samsung stated it "shares the Texas Attorney General's goal of promoting transparent and consumer-friendly privacy practices" while maintaining that its TVs "do not spy on customers."<ref name="therecord-samsung-settlement" /> Sony, LG, Hisense, & TCL had not settled as of the IAPP's January 2026 report.<ref name="iapp-acr" /> | Samsung became the first of the five manufacturers to settle, on 26 February 2026.<ref name="therecord-samsung-settlement" /> The settlement required Samsung to halt all ACR data collection without express consent & rewrite its consent screens to be "clear and conspicuous."<ref name="therecord-samsung-settlement" /> Samsung stated it "shares the Texas Attorney General's goal of promoting transparent and consumer-friendly privacy practices" while maintaining that its TVs "do not spy on customers."<ref name="therecord-samsung-settlement" /> Sony, LG, Hisense, & TCL had not settled as of the IAPP's January 2026 report.<ref name="iapp-acr" /> | ||
A separate federal class action, ''DiGiacinto v. Samsung Electronics America Inc.'' (Case No. 1:26-cv-00196, S.D.N.Y.), was filed on 09 January 2026, by five Samsung TV owners alleging the company collected & disclosed their viewing data without consent.<ref name="pacer-digiacinto">{{Cite web |title=DIGIACINTO et al v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc. |url=https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/62368800/DIGIACINTO_et_al_v_Samsung_Electronics_America,_Inc | | A separate federal class action, ''DiGiacinto v. Samsung Electronics America Inc.'' (Case No. 1:26-cv-00196, S.D.N.Y.), was filed on 09 January 2026, by five Samsung TV owners alleging the company collected & disclosed their viewing data without consent.<ref name="pacer-digiacinto">{{Cite web |title=DIGIACINTO et al v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc. |url=https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/62368800/DIGIACINTO_et_al_v_Samsung_Electronics_America,_Inc |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260407195220/https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/62368800/DIGIACINTO_et_al_v_Samsung_Electronics_America,_Inc |archive-date=2026-04-07 |access-date=2026-04-04 |website=PACER Monitor}}</ref> | ||
In 2017, the FTC settled with [[Vizio]] for $2.2 million after Vizio collected second-by-second viewing data on 11 million TVs without consent & sold it to advertisers with demographic information appended.<ref name="ftc-vizio">{{Cite web |date=2017-02-06 |title=VIZIO to Pay $2.2 Million to FTC, State of New Jersey to Settle Charges It Collected Viewing Histories on 11 Million Smart Televisions without Users' Consent |url=https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2017/02/vizio-pay-22-million-ftc-state-new-jersey-settle-charges-it-collected-viewing-histories-11-million | | In 2017, the FTC settled with [[Vizio]] for $2.2 million after Vizio collected second-by-second viewing data on 11 million TVs without consent & sold it to advertisers with demographic information appended.<ref name="ftc-vizio">{{Cite web |date=2017-02-06 |title=VIZIO to Pay $2.2 Million to FTC, State of New Jersey to Settle Charges It Collected Viewing Histories on 11 Million Smart Televisions without Users' Consent |url=https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2017/02/vizio-pay-22-million-ftc-state-new-jersey-settle-charges-it-collected-viewing-histories-11-million |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260317153711/https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2017/02/vizio-pay-22-million-ftc-state-new-jersey-settle-charges-it-collected-viewing-histories-11-million |archive-date=2026-03-17 |access-date=2026-04-04 |publisher=Federal Trade Commission}}</ref> The FTC required Vizio to delete the data & obtain affirmative express consent for future collection.<ref name="ftc-vizio" /> | ||
===Benchmark manipulation=== | ===Benchmark manipulation=== | ||
In June 2022, reviewers at HDTVTest & FlatpanelsHD discovered that Samsung's S95B QD-OLED & QN95B Neo QLED TVs were programmed to detect standard reviewer test patterns & artificially inflate performance measurements.<ref name="flatpanelshd-benchmark">{{Cite web |last=Larsen |first=Rasmus |date=2022-06-03 |title=Samsung caught cheating in TV benchmarks, promises software update |url=https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1654235588 | | In June 2022, reviewers at HDTVTest & FlatpanelsHD discovered that Samsung's S95B QD-OLED & QN95B Neo QLED TVs were programmed to detect standard reviewer test patterns & artificially inflate performance measurements.<ref name="flatpanelshd-benchmark">{{Cite web |last=Larsen |first=Rasmus |date=2022-06-03 |title=Samsung caught cheating in TV benchmarks, promises software update |url=https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1654235588 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260306085623/https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?id=1654235588&subaction=showfull |archive-date=2026-03-06 |access-date=2026-04-04 |website=FlatpanelsHD}}</ref><ref name="hdtvtest-benchmark">{{Cite web |title=Samsung caught using algorithms to mislead reviewers about display accuracy |url=https://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/Samsung-caught-using-algorithms-to-mislead-reviewers-about-display-accuracy |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251006103430/https://www.hdtvtest.co.uk/news/Samsung-caught-using-algorithms-to-mislead-reviewers-about-display-accuracy |archive-date=2025-10-06 |access-date=2026-04-04 |website=HDTVTest}}</ref> | ||
Professional TV calibrators use a standardized 10% window to measure HDR brightness & color accuracy. Samsung's firmware detected this specific window size & altered the TV's output.<ref name="hdtvtest-benchmark" /> On the QN95B, the TV boosted its peak brightness by approximately 80%, from a sustainable 1,300 nits to 2,300 nits, by sending short bursts of power into the miniLED backlight that couldn't be maintained without damaging the panel.<ref name="flatpanelshd-benchmark" /> On both models, the Electro-Optical Transfer Function (EOTF) & luminance tracking were adjusted to appear accurate to testing equipment.<ref name="flatpanelshd-benchmark" /><ref name="hdtvtest-benchmark" /> | Professional TV calibrators use a standardized 10% window to measure HDR brightness & color accuracy. Samsung's firmware detected this specific window size & altered the TV's output.<ref name="hdtvtest-benchmark" /> On the QN95B, the TV boosted its peak brightness by approximately 80%, from a sustainable 1,300 nits to 2,300 nits, by sending short bursts of power into the miniLED backlight that couldn't be maintained without damaging the panel.<ref name="flatpanelshd-benchmark" /> On both models, the Electro-Optical Transfer Function (EOTF) & luminance tracking were adjusted to appear accurate to testing equipment.<ref name="flatpanelshd-benchmark" /><ref name="hdtvtest-benchmark" /> | ||
| Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
Reviewers bypassed the cheat by switching to a non-standard 9% window. The firmware didn't recognize it, & the TV displayed its actual performance.<ref name="hdtvtest-benchmark" /> Vincent Teoh of HDTVTest first identified the issue during his S95B review; Rasmus Larsen of FlatpanelsHD confirmed it on the QN95B.<ref name="flatpanelshd-benchmark" /><ref name="hdtvtest-benchmark" /> | Reviewers bypassed the cheat by switching to a non-standard 9% window. The firmware didn't recognize it, & the TV displayed its actual performance.<ref name="hdtvtest-benchmark" /> Vincent Teoh of HDTVTest first identified the issue during his S95B review; Rasmus Larsen of FlatpanelsHD confirmed it on the QN95B.<ref name="flatpanelshd-benchmark" /><ref name="hdtvtest-benchmark" /> | ||
Samsung denied cheating, stating: "Samsung Electronics does not use any algorithm for the purpose of yielding specific test results."<ref name="techhive-benchmark">{{Cite web |title=Samsung TV benchmark brouhaha: Scandalous cheating, or tempest in a teapot? |url=https://www.techhive.com/article/784413/samsung-tv-benchmarks.html | | Samsung denied cheating, stating: "Samsung Electronics does not use any algorithm for the purpose of yielding specific test results."<ref name="techhive-benchmark">{{Cite web |title=Samsung TV benchmark brouhaha: Scandalous cheating, or tempest in a teapot? |url=https://www.techhive.com/article/784413/samsung-tv-benchmarks.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230609015926/https://www.techhive.com/article/784413/samsung-tv-benchmarks.html |archive-date=2023-06-09 |access-date=2026-04-04 |website=TechHive}}</ref> Samsung then pushed firmware update version 1211 for the S95B, which eliminated the discrepancy between 9% & 10% window measurements.<ref name="hdtvtest-benchmark" /> | ||
This wasn't Samsung's first benchmark manipulation. Samsung was previously caught artificially boosting processor performance on the Galaxy Note 3 & Galaxy S4 smartphones when they detected benchmarking software was running.<ref name="register-benchmark">{{Cite web |date=2022-06-15 |title=Samsung accused of cheating on hardware benchmarks -- again |url=https://www.theregister.com/2022/06/15/samsung_tv_benchmark/ | | This wasn't Samsung's first benchmark manipulation. Samsung was previously caught artificially boosting processor performance on the Galaxy Note 3 & Galaxy S4 smartphones when they detected benchmarking software was running.<ref name="register-benchmark">{{Cite web |date=2022-06-15 |title=Samsung accused of cheating on hardware benchmarks -- again |url=https://www.theregister.com/2022/06/15/samsung_tv_benchmark/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260219071258/https://www.theregister.com/2022/06/15/samsung_tv_benchmark/ |archive-date=2026-02-19 |access-date=2026-04-04 |website=The Register}}</ref> Samsung settled the resulting class action in 2019 for $13.4 million, paying Galaxy S4 owners $10 each.<ref name="register-s4-settlement">{{Cite web |date=2019-09-30 |title=Ever own a Galaxy S4? Congrats, you're $10 richer as Samsung agrees payout over dodgy speed tests |url=https://www.theregister.com/2019/09/30/samsung_benchmarking_settlement/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251227185943/https://www.theregister.com/2019/09/30/samsung_benchmarking_settlement/ |archive-date=2025-12-27 |access-date=2026-04-04 |website=The Register}}</ref> The settlement required Samsung to stop using benchmark-manipulating code in its smartphones for three years, after which Samsung was free to resume the practice.<ref name="register-s4-settlement" /> | ||
===Voice recording privacy controversy=== | ===Voice recording privacy controversy=== | ||
In February 2015, CNET's Chris Matyszczyk reported that Samsung's smart TV privacy policy warned: "Please be aware that if your spoken words include personal or other sensitive information, that information will be among the data captured and transmitted to a third party through your use of Voice Recognition."<ref name="cnet-voice">{{Cite web |last=Matyszczyk |first=Chris |date=2015-02-08 |title=Samsung's warning: Our Smart TVs record your living room chatter |url=https://www.cnet.com/news/privacy/samsungs-warning-our-smart-tvs-record-your-living-room-chatter/ | | In February 2015, CNET's Chris Matyszczyk reported that Samsung's smart TV privacy policy warned: "Please be aware that if your spoken words include personal or other sensitive information, that information will be among the data captured and transmitted to a third party through your use of Voice Recognition."<ref name="cnet-voice">{{Cite web |last=Matyszczyk |first=Chris |date=2015-02-08 |title=Samsung's warning: Our Smart TVs record your living room chatter |url=https://www.cnet.com/news/privacy/samsungs-warning-our-smart-tvs-record-your-living-room-chatter/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260310143537/https://www.cnet.com/news/privacy/samsungs-warning-our-smart-tvs-record-your-living-room-chatter/ |archive-date=2026-03-10 |access-date=2026-04-04 |website=CNET}}</ref> The third-party contractor processing the voice data was Nuance Communications, a voice-to-text company.<ref name="computerworld-epic">{{Cite web |title=EPIC files FTC complaint about Samsung's Smart TV 'surveillance' |url=https://www.computerworld.com/article/1618951/epic-files-ftc-complaint-about-samsungs-smart-tv-surveillance.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251003165231/https://www.computerworld.com/article/1618951/epic-files-ftc-complaint-about-samsungs-smart-tv-surveillance.html |archive-date=2025-10-03 |access-date=2026-04-04 |website=Computerworld}}</ref> | ||
Samsung published a blog post on 10 February 2015 titled "Samsung Smart TVs Do Not Monitor Living Room Conversations."<ref name="samsung-response-voice">{{Cite web |date=2015-02-10 |title=Samsung Smart TVs Do Not Monitor Living Room Conversations |url=https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-smart-tvs-do-not-monitor-living-room-conversations | | Samsung published a blog post on 10 February 2015 titled "Samsung Smart TVs Do Not Monitor Living Room Conversations."<ref name="samsung-response-voice">{{Cite web |date=2015-02-10 |title=Samsung Smart TVs Do Not Monitor Living Room Conversations |url=https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-smart-tvs-do-not-monitor-living-room-conversations |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260224161152/https://news.samsung.com/global/samsung-smart-tvs-do-not-monitor-living-room-conversations |archive-date=2026-02-24 |access-date=2026-04-04 |website=Samsung Newsroom}}</ref> Samsung clarified that voice data was only transmitted when users pressed an activation button on the remote control to perform a search, & updated its privacy policy to explain this mechanism.<ref name="samsung-response-voice" /> | ||
EPIC (the Electronic Privacy Information Center) filed a formal complaint with the FTC on 24 February 2015, alleging Samsung violated the FTC Act, the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), & the Cable Communications Policy Act.<ref name="epic-complaint">{{Cite web |title=Samsung "SmartTV" Complaint |url=https://epic.org/documents/samsung-smarttv-complaint/ | | EPIC (the Electronic Privacy Information Center) filed a formal complaint with the FTC on 24 February 2015, alleging Samsung violated the FTC Act, the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), & the Cable Communications Policy Act.<ref name="epic-complaint">{{Cite web |title=Samsung "SmartTV" Complaint |url=https://epic.org/documents/samsung-smarttv-complaint/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260208191503/https://epic.org/documents/samsung-smarttv-complaint/ |archive-date=2026-02-08 |access-date=2026-04-04 |publisher=Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC)}}</ref> EPIC alleged that Samsung routinely intercepted private communications in the home & marketed its smart TVs to children under 13 without obtaining parental consent as required by COPPA.<ref name="epic-complaint" /> | ||
A security researcher then discovered that Samsung was transmitting some voice recordings unencrypted, in plain text.<ref name="computerworld-epic" /> Samsung later conceded it had not deployed the software necessary to encrypt these transmissions.<ref name="epic-complaint" /> | A security researcher then discovered that Samsung was transmitting some voice recordings unencrypted, in plain text.<ref name="computerworld-epic" /> Samsung later conceded it had not deployed the software necessary to encrypt these transmissions.<ref name="epic-complaint" /> | ||
In March 2017, WikiLeaks' "Vault 7" data dump revealed that the CIA had developed a hacking tool codenamed "Weeping Angel" that targeted Samsung Smart TVs.<ref name="cbsnews-weeping-angel">{{Cite web |title=WikiLeaks says CIA hacked Samsung smart TVs |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cia-hacked-samsung-smart-tvs-wikileaks-vault-7/ | | In March 2017, WikiLeaks' "Vault 7" data dump revealed that the CIA had developed a hacking tool codenamed "Weeping Angel" that targeted Samsung Smart TVs.<ref name="cbsnews-weeping-angel">{{Cite web |title=WikiLeaks says CIA hacked Samsung smart TVs |url=https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cia-hacked-samsung-smart-tvs-wikileaks-vault-7/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251229183626/https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cia-hacked-samsung-smart-tvs-wikileaks-vault-7/ |archive-date=2025-12-29 |access-date=2026-04-04 |website=CBS News}}</ref> According to the leaked engineering notes, the tool was co-developed with MI5, installed via USB, & placed the TV into a "Fake-Off" mode where the screen appeared powered down but the microphone remained active, recording room audio.<ref name="wikileaks-weeping-angel">{{Cite web |title=Weeping Angel (Extending) Engineering Notes |url=https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_12353643.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260206153314/https://wikileaks.org/ciav7p1/cms/page_12353643.html |archive-date=2026-02-06 |access-date=2026-04-04 |publisher=WikiLeaks}}</ref> | ||
===Post-purchase advertising=== | ===Post-purchase advertising=== | ||
Samsung displays advertisements on smart TVs that consumers have already purchased.<ref name="flatpanelshd-ads">{{Cite web |title=Samsung TV owners complain about increasingly obtrusive ads |url=https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1583755244 | | Samsung displays advertisements on smart TVs that consumers have already purchased.<ref name="flatpanelshd-ads">{{Cite web |title=Samsung TV owners complain about increasingly obtrusive ads |url=https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?subaction=showfull&id=1583755244 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20251220035501/https://www.flatpanelshd.com/news.php?id=1583755244&subaction=showfull |archive-date=2025-12-20 |access-date=2026-04-04 |website=FlatpanelsHD}}</ref> Users have reported ads appearing on the home screen & during normal TV use.<ref name="flatpanelshd-ads" /> | ||
Samsung operates a dedicated advertising division, Samsung Ads, which sells targeted advertising across its TV ecosystem. Samsung Ads promotes access to "TV viewing data from the world's #1 Smart TV footprint" & first-party data from Samsung devices to help advertisers reach audiences.<ref name="samsung-ads">{{Cite web |title=Samsung Ads |url=https://www.samsung.com/us/business/samsungads/ | | Samsung operates a dedicated advertising division, Samsung Ads, which sells targeted advertising across its TV ecosystem. Samsung Ads promotes access to "TV viewing data from the world's #1 Smart TV footprint" & first-party data from Samsung devices to help advertisers reach audiences.<ref name="samsung-ads">{{Cite web |title=Samsung Ads |url=https://www.samsung.com/us/business/samsungads/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260316121822/https://www.samsung.com/us/business/samsungads/ |archive-date=2026-03-16 |access-date=2026-04-04 |publisher=Samsung}}</ref> | ||
==See also== | ==See also== | ||