Several points which I don't believe are true:
> Data privacy regulations like the GDPR make cookie consent banners a necessary part of your website.
The GDPR doesn't. Functionally-necessary data processing does not need consent. You only need consent when you can't use any of the other legal bases for data processing. You can just choose to not do those things for which a non-consent legal basis doesn't apply.
> Many websites use a little trick to ensure the user accepts their cookies by making the “Accept All” button more prominent than the other consent buttons. Is this underhanded? Yes, but it’s not against any regulations. That is, as long as the “Reject” option is there and is clear for the user to take it.
To the best of my knowledge, this is actually against the regulations. The ICO's interpretation also supports this opinion: https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/uk-gdpr-guidance-and-re...:
> Consent requires a positive opt-in. Don’t use pre-ticked boxes or any other method of default consent.
Making the consent button more prominent and reject button tiny would surely count similarly to using a pre-ticked checkbox (both options attempt to sway the choice by making accepting easier than declining)? It is at the very least definitely against the spirit of the law.
The falsehood that all cookies require consent strikes again:
> if your website is only available in one language (i.e. English), then there’s no need to have language preference cookies.
Language preference and other functional cookies never needed consent nor a banner, see first point.
Unfortunately advice like this will at best mislead website owners to unnecessarily degrade UX by implementing consent flow for data processing activities that don't require it, and at worst will put them at risk if they implement this advice for activities that do require consent (as I don't think consent acquired following this advice would count as valid).
