In those terms it sounds perfectly reasonable. Just as "Preferences in clothing and music are the leading indicators of political leaning" is rather different t

In those terms it sounds perfectly reasonable. Just as "Preferences in clothing and music are the leading indicators of political leaning" is rather different to "Preferences in clothing and music are two strong indicators, of the dozens of factors we used to infer political leaning". Just like Google use hundreds of factors, with probably a few more significant ones, to decide search placement. I'm sure inferences can be made in aggregate, but the precision that is implied in the article, from just two indicators is a leap. Shoddy reporting, or a little too much hyperbole from someone giving a conference speech I couldn't say. It's the sort of thing that gives rise to 30 minutes of comedy in the office when there's been some reason, like a news piece, to view FB, google or other profiles. We inevitably find that half the office is mis-gendered, aged, those with children don't and vice versa, and on. These profiles seem to get most people wrong much of the time, but be worth something in aggregate. :)