I agree on that point. I believe that micro-targeting of ads is how harmful content (outright scams as well as conspiracy theories and other misinformation) is

I agree on that point. I believe that micro-targeting of ads is how harmful content (outright scams as well as conspiracy theories and other misinformation) is able to get promoted in ways that allow it to proliferate which was not possible in the past. My theory is that back when TV stations and newspapers were locally owned, editorial staff filtered out the extreme and harmful content as a means to protect their own reputation. Being trustworthy was important if the owner was an active member in the community. If you wanted to promote conspiracy theories, the reasonable people who saw those ads would complain about them and go to the editors and owners of the content delivery platforms to get those ads pulled. The whole system was self regulating in a way that online platforms have made impossible. As ownership of content platforms is disconnected from local communities, it becomes more profitable to engage in exploitative behaviour that would not be acceptable on a local scale. Computers simply don't care if you trust them or not, and we the programmers have yet to make that an important factor in how platforms decide which content is promoted to end users. I have no idea how to improve this situation outside of legislation by our governments.