3 ms·

I don't know if targeted advertising can ever be ethical, and even if it can, I doubt we'll see Meta doing it any time soon. But just to play devil's advocate.

I don't know if targeted advertising can ever be ethical, and even if it can, I doubt we'll see Meta doing it any time soon. But just to play devil's advocate... are we sure that for-profit colleges aren't disproportionally targeting black people? Meta may just be the messenger here.

atlas_hugged 2y ago
You mean dealer?
- __MatrixMan__ 2y ago
  Yes, that's a much better word.
jimbob45 2y ago
It would be trivial to check the proportion of for-profit HBCUs to nonprofit HBCUs but given the title of the website, I sense that they may not have checked on purpose.
- jnordwick 2y ago
  They picked universities in Bronx NY, NJ (near Newark), and 30 miles from Chicago and paired them against universities in Colorado, Kanasas, and Arizona State.
sneak 2y ago
Why is any targeted advertising unethical? I don’t like advertising, but I see no ethical problem whatsoever with it.
- zinodaur 2y ago
  It lets companies profit off of our secrets, often in ways that hurt us (e.g. this article) and doesn't provide any positive social value.
  - sneak 2y ago
    I don’t think it’s secret if you give it to Facebook. Furthermore, something doesn’t need to provide social value to be ethical. I think that the vast majority of people don’t really care about privacy, and aren’t divulging anything remotely “secret” by providing all of their browsing history to ad companies. The tools for not doing so are a two second websearch away for everyone, and most people don’t bother.
    - jjj123 2y ago
      Is it a secret how long I subconsciously linger on a single post as I scroll through my Instagram feed? I’d argue that it’s even more private than a secret, it’s something I may not be aware of and have little control over.
- BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
  Because the purpose is to use knowledge about someone, along with a toolbox of weird psychological tricks, to manipulate them into spending their money (time) on things they don’t need. It’s as unethical as lying or scamming.
  - sneak 2y ago
    All advertising is an attempt to manipulate someone into spending their money. Either all advertising is unethical (and it isn’t), or targeted advertising is not, methinks. Lying and scamming are fraudulent. Advertising (in the usual case) is absolutely not. There is a bright line difference and equating them is not a useful logical reasoning device.
    - BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
      >all advertising is unethical No, advertising that aims to manipulate you into an unnecessary purchase is unethical. There’s some fuzzy line here where an advertisement like “bob’s hardware: come on down to bob’s for high quality pickaxes” is acceptable and a coca cola ad isn’t. Almost all modern advertising is the latter, and it’s most certainly unethical. I’d happily call it borderline fraudulent; these companies claim through subconscious implication things like “this car will make you happy and everyone will respect you more,” which is a bold faced lie. Basically all modern advertising is unethical; it wouldn’t be the first time something unethical was widespread because it was profitable.
  - xvector 2y ago
    That's fine. I've discovered plenty of cool products through Insta that I wouldn't have found otherwise.
    - BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
      Cool, I’m glad it worked for you. I do think those examples are the exceptions to the norm though, and represent a small portion of the ads shoved into our faces.
  - 2y ago
- __MatrixMan__ 2y ago
  You're trying to get people to do something without their consent. It's fundamentally coercive. Different in degree, but not in kind, to closing a road and routing traffic through your restaurant's drive through lane. Additionally, we have institutions that (allegedly) function based on rational decision making by agents with access to accurate information (markets, democracy, etc). Investment in advertising beyond simply making information available to those who seek it erodes the efficacy of those institutions. It's like putting stickers on your windshield... Even if their content is not objectionable, you're going to end up less safe because you can't see past them. For a concrete example of the latter: education outcomes are trending poorly, many teachers blame phone addiction. But if you look at what those students are doing on their phones, it's engaging with some advertising platform or another. We've created an environment where good dopamine hygiene requires skillful evasion of one of our most well funded industries. We're surely shooting ourselves, and each other, in the foot here. If polluting the physical world with hazards waste is unethical, than surely there is something equivalently unethical regarding information.

atlas_hugged 2y ago

You mean dealer?

__MatrixMan__ 2y ago
Yes, that's a much better word.

jimbob45 2y ago

It would be trivial to check the proportion of for-profit HBCUs to nonprofit HBCUs but given the title of the website, I sense that they may not have checked on purpose.

jnordwick 2y ago
They picked universities in Bronx NY, NJ (near Newark), and 30 miles from Chicago and paired them against universities in Colorado, Kanasas, and Arizona State.

sneak 2y ago

Why is any targeted advertising unethical? I don’t like advertising, but I see no ethical problem whatsoever with it.

zinodaur 2y ago
It lets companies profit off of our secrets, often in ways that hurt us (e.g. this article) and doesn't provide any positive social value.
- sneak 2y ago
  I don’t think it’s secret if you give it to Facebook. Furthermore, something doesn’t need to provide social value to be ethical. I think that the vast majority of people don’t really care about privacy, and aren’t divulging anything remotely “secret” by providing all of their browsing history to ad companies. The tools for not doing so are a two second websearch away for everyone, and most people don’t bother.
  - jjj123 2y ago
    Is it a secret how long I subconsciously linger on a single post as I scroll through my Instagram feed? I’d argue that it’s even more private than a secret, it’s something I may not be aware of and have little control over.
BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
Because the purpose is to use knowledge about someone, along with a toolbox of weird psychological tricks, to manipulate them into spending their money (time) on things they don’t need. It’s as unethical as lying or scamming.
- sneak 2y ago
  All advertising is an attempt to manipulate someone into spending their money. Either all advertising is unethical (and it isn’t), or targeted advertising is not, methinks. Lying and scamming are fraudulent. Advertising (in the usual case) is absolutely not. There is a bright line difference and equating them is not a useful logical reasoning device.
  - BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
    >all advertising is unethical No, advertising that aims to manipulate you into an unnecessary purchase is unethical. There’s some fuzzy line here where an advertisement like “bob’s hardware: come on down to bob’s for high quality pickaxes” is acceptable and a coca cola ad isn’t. Almost all modern advertising is the latter, and it’s most certainly unethical. I’d happily call it borderline fraudulent; these companies claim through subconscious implication things like “this car will make you happy and everyone will respect you more,” which is a bold faced lie. Basically all modern advertising is unethical; it wouldn’t be the first time something unethical was widespread because it was profitable.
- xvector 2y ago
  That's fine. I've discovered plenty of cool products through Insta that I wouldn't have found otherwise.
  - BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
    Cool, I’m glad it worked for you. I do think those examples are the exceptions to the norm though, and represent a small portion of the ads shoved into our faces.
- 2y ago
__MatrixMan__ 2y ago
You're trying to get people to do something without their consent. It's fundamentally coercive. Different in degree, but not in kind, to closing a road and routing traffic through your restaurant's drive through lane. Additionally, we have institutions that (allegedly) function based on rational decision making by agents with access to accurate information (markets, democracy, etc). Investment in advertising beyond simply making information available to those who seek it erodes the efficacy of those institutions. It's like putting stickers on your windshield... Even if their content is not objectionable, you're going to end up less safe because you can't see past them. For a concrete example of the latter: education outcomes are trending poorly, many teachers blame phone addiction. But if you look at what those students are doing on their phones, it's engaging with some advertising platform or another. We've created an environment where good dopamine hygiene requires skillful evasion of one of our most well funded industries. We're surely shooting ourselves, and each other, in the foot here. If polluting the physical world with hazards waste is unethical, than surely there is something equivalently unethical regarding information.