3 ms·
The problem is that microtargeted ads aren't necessarily more relevant to your interests — they're more tailored to you. For example, an advertiser might be ab
by Vinnl 5y ago
The problem is that microtargeted ads aren't necessarily more relevant to your interests — they're more tailored to you.
For example, an advertiser might be able to microtarget people with certain characteristics that correlate with voting for a particular political party, and bombard them with ads that discourage them from voting.
That's targeted, but not "relevant".
- TeMPOraL 5y agoAgreed. And perhaps if we call them "optimized" instead of "targeted", this becomes more obvious. The goal of the advertiser isn't to create a win-win situation, where you get just the right ad at the right time, for a good deal on what you actually need. That would be nice, but it's leaving money on the table - and the goal of the advertiser is to make money. So the ads get optimized further: a better ad is one that gets you to buy something regardless of whether you need it, on a deal that's as bad for you as possible without burning you as a future customer[0]. -- [0] - Which does not imply the deal isn't absolutely shitty. There are ways to guarantee you'll buy again, no matter how much you hate it. See e.g. the telecom industry - there's only few players on the market, and they're all equally shitty, and it doesn't matter because people need phone service, and those abandoning telco A in anger are offset by those flocking to A from the other telcos.