4 ms·

In addition to the whole fox guarding the henhouse issue, this doesn't address the primary harms of user tracking: That it's just bad for society that people ar

In addition to the whole fox guarding the henhouse issue, this doesn't address the primary harms of user tracking: That it's just bad for society that people are targeted and advertised to on this level, as it fosters filter bubbles and encourages unhealthy behaviors. Tracking a group of 1,000 people to cater bad political ads isn't meaningfully better than targeting 1,000 individuals with bad political ads. Targeted advertising needs to be treated like unfair gambling practices. Banned across the board, and the industry that remains needs to be heavily regulated and forced to be completely transparent about the process.

maweki 6y ago
> Targeted advertising needs to be [...] banned across the board You say that like an absolute that is enforceable. Advertising has been targeted since advertising exists. Advertisers have been choosing radio or billboard-slots for well over 100 years (well, radio for 100, print and billboards probably for centuries), using data or educated guesses to reach a target demographic. As advertisers now choose on which sites (or not) their ads should appear, in order to reach their target demographic. Of course, they can choose by a few more criteria now. How ubiquitous should a specific ad be, so that it would not be "targeted" advertisement? I think we need legislation, but it's not black and white. There's a huge grey line that spans all of advertising history. Edit: just to be clear, choosing whether to advertise in a newspaper (and which) on radio (and which channel), or on facebook, is already targeting for a desired audience.
- ocdtrekkie 6y ago
  I suppose I should clarify: User targeting should be banned across the board. Content targeting should not: Feel free to put ads next to particular news articles, sites, or TV shows.
  - bseidensticker 6y ago
    It's no so cut and dry though. If you've ever watched golf on TV you will notice that the most prominent advertising is for insurance companies (User) not golf equipment (Content). They are advertising to the cohort of users that watch golf on tv (rich business people). It's all user targeting.
    - ocdtrekkie 6y ago
      That's still content targeting: They're basing the ads they place next to content based on the expected audience for that content. Everyone watching that content sees that ad, no problem. We get into issues when we're dealing with ads being placed based on who is viewing the content.
- grishka 6y ago
  > You say that like an absolute that is enforceable. It is possible to make it technically impossible. Not allowing third-party cookies is one way. This alone would only allow targeting by the coarse location derived from the IP and by the user agent string.
qwertox 6y ago
I have no issues with targeted advertising as long as the ad's topic is deduced from the context of the page I'm visiting. Cookies aren't required for that. If I buy a MTB magazine, I do expect to see some ads from this or that bike-producing company (even though I'd prefer them not to be there).

maweki 6y ago

> Targeted advertising needs to be [...] banned across the board You say that like an absolute that is enforceable. Advertising has been targeted since advertising exists. Advertisers have been choosing radio or billboard-slots for well over 100 years (well, radio for 100, print and billboards probably for centuries), using data or educated guesses to reach a target demographic. As advertisers now choose on which sites (or not) their ads should appear, in order to reach their target demographic. Of course, they can choose by a few more criteria now. How ubiquitous should a specific ad be, so that it would not be "targeted" advertisement? I think we need legislation, but it's not black and white. There's a huge grey line that spans all of advertising history. Edit: just to be clear, choosing whether to advertise in a newspaper (and which) on radio (and which channel), or on facebook, is already targeting for a desired audience.

ocdtrekkie 6y ago
I suppose I should clarify: User targeting should be banned across the board. Content targeting should not: Feel free to put ads next to particular news articles, sites, or TV shows.
- bseidensticker 6y ago
  It's no so cut and dry though. If you've ever watched golf on TV you will notice that the most prominent advertising is for insurance companies (User) not golf equipment (Content). They are advertising to the cohort of users that watch golf on tv (rich business people). It's all user targeting.
  - ocdtrekkie 6y ago
    That's still content targeting: They're basing the ads they place next to content based on the expected audience for that content. Everyone watching that content sees that ad, no problem. We get into issues when we're dealing with ads being placed based on who is viewing the content.
grishka 6y ago
> You say that like an absolute that is enforceable. It is possible to make it technically impossible. Not allowing third-party cookies is one way. This alone would only allow targeting by the coarse location derived from the IP and by the user agent string.

qwertox 6y ago

I have no issues with targeted advertising as long as the ad's topic is deduced from the context of the page I'm visiting. Cookies aren't required for that. If I buy a MTB magazine, I do expect to see some ads from this or that bike-producing company (even though I'd prefer them not to be there).