The Vergecast: "The Case for Banning Cookie Banners"

Date: April 7, 2026
Hosts: Nilay Patel, David Pierce
Guests: Kate Klonick (professor and author), Allison Johnson (The Verge)

Episode Overview

This episode takes on two major tech-life intersections: the chronic annoyance of cookie banners online and the new AI-powered Google Maps feature, Ask Maps. First, law professor and writer Kate Klonick explains why Cookie Banners should be abolished entirely, tracing their regulatory, technological, and societal impacts. Later, reviewer Allison Johnson shares hands-on experiences with Ask Maps, pondering how AI is changing real-world routines, and answers a hotline question about the elusive dream of an E Ink phone.

Main Segment 1: The Case Against Cookie Banners

Guest: Kate Klonick
Timestamps: [05:37-34:30]

The Problem with Cookie Banners

• Cookie banners are described as “one of those sort of low grade annoyances of being online” (Nilay Patel 05:53), disrupting the user experience and rarely providing meaningful privacy protection.
• Kate’s motivation: Having lived in both the US and EU, she experienced heightened frustration, especially in Europe where the banners are more aggressive. She calls them an “oppressive level of clicking through and this block to me getting to this very simple thing that I wanted” (Kate Klonick 06:00).
• Banners often must be agreed to multiple times on the same site, underscoring the absurdity.

How Did We Get Here?

• The history of cookie banners traces back to the EU’s ePrivacy Directive and the emergence of the internet ad economy:
  • Early 2000s ad mergers (DoubleClick, Google) raised privacy concerns about cookies as tracking tools.
  • Cookies are “neutral technology... pretty necessary for how the Internet works” (Klonick 08:13), but became powerful trackers.
• The ePrivacy Directive required that users have “the right to refuse such processing” (Klonick 09:30). It didn’t mandate banners specifically; industry interpretation (“regulatory capture”) led to banners as the compliance tool.
• The belief that cookie banners were born out of GDPR is only partially true—they existed in force before and GDPR “put it a little bit on steroids” (Klonick 11:10).

Are Cookie Banners Harmful or Just Annoying?

• Nilay notes: Most people see them as a “small cost,” maybe annoying but not actively harmful ([13:08]).
• Klonick’s thesis: Cookie banners are actively counterproductive:
  • They create a detente between regulators and industry, reducing pressure for better privacy tools or laws (14:29).
  • “Having cookie banners in place actually prevents room for discussion of a new solution.… If you get rid of cookie banners, then the vacuum will create a discussion necessarily” (Klonick 16:19).
  • They give “manufactured consent”—the illusion of agency and transparency—but not the reality.

Notable Quotes

• On manufactured consent:
  “It feels like all of this sits right next to the terms of service and the privacy policies and all of the other things we click… and no one ever reads them.” (Patel 17:39)
• On the limitations of informed consent:
  “The world that we're living in has this kind of constant ability to barrage you with information and to use these kinds of nice ideas of consent and transparency. And it's very hard to actually be empowered even with transparency and even with kind of moments of agency because of how power works in these systems.” (Klonick 20:05)

What's a Better Solution?

• Possible alternatives (none perfect, but worth debate):
  • Privacy controls at the browser level or through middleware
  • More serious, technology-literate policy about non-personally-identifiable data
  • Economic compensation for user data (“maybe we do it economically instead of like giving them cookie banners,” Klonick 21:18)
• Crucially, Klonick advocates for “getting rid of forms” to focus on real issues and reduce noise that disguises genuine privacy problems (18:40).

Regulatory Power Negotiations: Brussels vs California

• Nilay raises the “Brussels Effect”—the global impact of EU policy.
• Klonick counters that in Europe, the “California Effect” is cited to describe how US/Californian tech design dominates by default.
• Both perspectives reveal tension over who should set privacy standards internationally (25:00-27:00).

Potential for Real Change

• The EU is now “rethinking and… simplifying their policy around data protection” (Patel 30:18).
• Klonick is “optimistic” about meaningful revision, especially as AI agentic features challenge the viability of banners (Klonick 30:23).
• Memorable analogy:
  • “It’s kind of like when you...your bulb burned out, and so you have to walk across the room in the dark and always bump your shins on the coffee table on your way there…and so you just keep walking across the living room. It's like, well, you don't have to have bruised shins, my dude” (Klonick 34:04)

Main Segment 2: Ask Maps, Gemini, and Real-World AI

Guest: Allison Johnson
Timestamps: [37:58-66:58]

What Is Ask Maps?

• Google Maps’ Ask Maps is essentially Gemini, Google’s chatbot/AI assistant, embedded within Maps:
  • “You tap the little thing that says Ask Maps… and you just kind of freestyle and ask about things around you.” (Johnson 39:09)
  • It leverages Google user reviews, real-time info (weather, etc.), and more.

Who’s It For?

• Both Allison and Nilay identify as “recreational” Google Maps users—they poke around, build lists, and enjoy exploring.
• Ask Maps is for users who want discovery, context, or synthesized recommendations (“I'm looking for a coffee shop where I can bring my laptop to work for the afternoon” (Johnson 43:33))—not just for point A to B routing.

How Good Is It?

• Effective at combining disparate criteria and handling multi-stop itineraries.
  • “It charted me a little route… and it had all of the… the bus should get you home by 4:30. So it was pretty complete” (Johnson 48:38).
• Weakness: Not personalized enough—offers places already visited, has trouble exporting itineraries to other Google services.

Notable Moments & Quotes

• On the overwhelming choice problem:
  “I look at Google Maps, I'm like, I could go anywhere… and then I tend to end up in like my safe zone… having a computer be like, hey, you're going to Tacos Chukis. And I'm like, sure” (Johnson 50:41)
• On successful trade-offs with Google:
  “This is a staggeringly useful piece of technology, right? To give me the real time traffic information and to tell me where the cops are and to tell me the accident that's coming up… we give it a vast amount of data about us and about everyone, but in return, we get this incredibly useful tool.” (Patel 61:08)

The Privacy Quandary

• Both wrestle with the deeply personal data Ask Maps/Google Maps knows:
  • “Google Maps knows where I live, but the idea of it knowing that I've arrived home freaks me out… it doesn’t make any sense, but it is how I feel.” (Patel 61:08)
  • Johnson describes how the AI's awareness of family members and history, when made explicit, can feel uncanny.

Practical Outcomes

• Johnson reports genuinely fun, effective planning—Ask Maps made her city day easier, more adventurous, and “helped in my mental state… I had honestly the best day” (Johnson 66:08).
• The hosts agree it’s worth trying, especially for breaking out of “ruts” or finding new places.

Hotline Q&A: The Elusive E Ink Phone

Timestamps: [70:26-78:53]

The Question

Stephen from Montreal asks if a “good E Ink phone” could be the ideal minimalist device to escape social media and dopamine traps.

Discussion Highlights

• Both Nilay and Allison have experimented with E Ink devices (e.g., Boox Palma, TCL’s Next Paper).
• E Ink sharply limits distractions (you “won’t watch TikTok”), but “9 out of 10 apps that I use on my phone suck on the Boox Palma” (Patel 74:45).
• Nilay suggests the real innovation could be a phone with hardware-enforced modes or switches to encourage intentional use—a friction element between distraction and focus, rather than a fully hobbled device.
• “Maybe if we can figure out how to do that, that's more useful than trying to, like, totally ruin the user experience in the name of using your phone less” (Patel 78:24).

Key Quotes & Takeaways

On Cookie Banners

• “Cookie banners… it just became. I just was like, you know… this tangible piece of tech policy everyone could relate to” (Klonick 06:39)
• “We would be better off without them than this world with them” (Klonick 12:52)
• “You don’t have to have bruised shins, my dude. Your life could be as simple as a light switch.” (Klonick 34:04)

On Ask Maps & AI

• “The fairest trade in all of technology is mapping apps” (Patel 38:25)
• “A successful answer is so much more important than like, I'm going to spend 30 minutes finding the perfect place for us to go.” (Patel 55:16)

On Digital Minimalism

• “9 out of 10 apps…suck on the Boox Palma. Four of those I would love to not use and I'm happy they suck. But the other five I need all day every day” (Patel 75:05)
• “That one added bit of friction might be… especially if it is like a switch you have to throw… even that might be enough” (Patel 78:04)

Episode Structure & Timestamps

• [00:00] Intro & host banter
• [05:37] Main Interview: Kate Klonick on banning cookie banners
• [37:58] Segment 2: Allison Johnson on using Ask Maps
• [70:26] Hotline Question: Could an E Ink phone save us?
• [79:42] Outro and show updates

Summary

This is a rich, user-focused episode examining the ways tech mandates and features shape our online choices, habits, and frustrations. Klonick's argument against cookie banners is that their harm is systemic as well as psychological—they do not provide real agency, inhibit progress, and create workarounds instead of solutions. Johnson’s review of Ask Maps paints AI as a facilitator for discovery and breaking out of consumer “ruts,” while also renewing urgency around privacy and user comfort. The episode closes with a playful but sharp look at digital minimalism, reinforcing that design friction—not deprivation—may be the path forward.

For listeners:

• You’ll come away with a nuanced understanding of how bad policy becomes entrenched design (cookie banners), and how new tech like AI in maps can be both liberating and unsettling.
• Whether you’re annoyed by privacy prompts, curious about AI practicalities, or fantasizing about a minimalist device retreat, this episode has thought-provoking—and occasionally actionable—answers.