zlacker

I don't understand. We were able to run with untargeted ads for decades. Why now, suddenly only targeted ads are viable?

>>gpdere+(OP)
That's not true, ads have always been targeted. On the telly you don't see the same ads on all stations all the time. They are segmented depending on the average profile of the viewer. If you are watching a soap opera you will see ads for diapers for female incontinence.

>>vasdae+12
Of course I meant targeted to the specific reader/watcher. Context targeting was not the issue.

>>vasdae+12
> ads have always been targeted.

To groups, not individuals. Soap operas cast a wide net, they don’t target you specifically. Which is very much possible with Facebook ads.

https://observer.com/2014/09/marketing-whiz-drives-roommate-...

>>gpdere+(OP)
If you manage to normalize the unencumbered profiling of people's online behavior (which increasingly spans like 100% of what people do) you wield enormous power which can be monetized in countless ways. So its not just about the type of ads. It is about the legality of monetizing user behavior where that profiling, in particular involves collecting and integrating data way beyond any bilateral interaction.

This is not idle talk. Think e.g. about personal credit. An important consideration in certain banking models is filtering out good from bad credits. Guess what, so-called "alternative credit data" which include social media activity is already a thing (search for it).

Its basically a digital wild west. Greed, hypocrisy, misrepresentation, collusion, corruption. As a rule, anything that is not be prohibited by draconian fines and license removals will be done. The honeypot is irresistible and people left on their own are just digitally illiterate idiots.