I find the whole jargon of this post dystopian.
My Instagram feed shows me lots of startup clothing companies for young to middle aged men, and I finally tried some, and damnit if they aren't decent jeans.
If we accept that ads are not inherently evil, and we accept that ads (when not manipulative or selling unethical/addictive products) are more beneficial to a recipient if they're relevant, then targeting (if done ethically and stored as anonymously as possible) is a great thing.
I find that the ads are actually more straightforward than traditional ads. They literally say "These jeans are stylish, durable and American-made". I didn't sit through 30 seconds of Brett Favre throwing a football to signal that I'm just like him.
But I don’t think ads can target ethically and with respect for privacy. I’d love to be proven wrong.
It can only be considered "a great thing" as a response to an earlier status quo, but it's not one in and of itself. Taken to its logical conclusion, in a world where you can encounter dozens of targeted ads in a day, what happens when every single one you is a fantastic fit for you? It's surely not "a great thing" for mental health to have things you truly desire shown to you at a frequency faster than you can afford them, especially in a world where credit loophole agencies like Klarna prey on the vulnerable. And this isn't even opening the data privacy can of worms which is required to achieve that, or the fact that these platforms are competitive and reward the highest spender for any given perfect fit.
At least let's try to stave off the dystopian future for a little while longer and hold on to the notion that consumerism doesn't have to be optimised into ever more efficient workflows. Even if you enjoy shopping, doesn't this take out some of the excitement and satisfaction? How long now before some unknown third party is monitoring your spending habits to deduce your payday, sells that information to another third party that buys data from a smart speaker company which overheard you discussing jeans in a public place and automatically sends a message selling the lead to the highest bidding jeans shop who has the product in stock in the waist size which is available from another this party and your virtual assistant puts an event in your calendar telling you to be at home to receive it?
I run a theater troupe. We do a little bit of Facebook boosting. Our customers are spread thin: there are people who want to see Shakespeare, but they don't cluster in one place.
We do use geography in our buying; nobody is going to travel 100 miles to see us. But if I showed it to 1,000 random people even in a 20 mile radius, the odds are that 999 will be completely disinterested, and the 1 remaining person will be doing something else that weekend.
On the other hand if I show it to 1,000 people who have shown at least a little interest in theater, or Shakespeare, or literature -- and who have the money to spend $20 on a theater ticket[1] -- maybe I'll find a few people who would actually come.
I wouldn't show my ads on a bus stop. It would cost a fortune and probably do no good. I spend $30 or so, and I get a few extra bodies out, because my ads are targeted.
This is just an example I happen to be familiar with. Perhaps it's a little too abstruse to be applicable. But it's what I think of whenever I hear people railing about all ads. There are a lot of things for which blanket advertising just wouldn't work.
I'm not even trying to turn a profit or pay salaries. I just want to do some good art that people might enjoy. It's worth getting the word out for it, and not pester every single person on the planet about it.
----- [1] I make it as cheap as I can, but theater space costs money.
The key to all this is that it’s expensive because they are targeted. If you could show 1M less targeted people for the same money you would show it to the same people.
Sure, 999/1000 people would see an ad they weren’t interested in, but that’s inevitable with less intrusive tracking.
I also wouldn’t mind being shown a very well targeted theater ad if I had volunteered that info. But if that info is gathered without my consent I just shouldn’t see the ad, and that’s regardless of whether 90% of the free content of the web and a huge number of small businesses die in the process.
For reference, our marketing strategy is opt-in email newsletters, organic social media, the occasional sponsorship of events, and natural word-of-mouth (no incentive). And we've been in business for 12+ years.
Opt-in, or "kinda opt-in"? Or you just don't know and trust whoever publish that newsletters?
Seriously newsletters are the most annoying ads I get and by far. So many are not really opt-in, but instead use dark patterns to make you sign up.
Targeting doesn’t have to imply tracking or trading in my info. Facebook knows my age and gender, and some of my interests (from groups etc). That should be plenty. That means a company that sells kitchens can’t target people “interested in kitchens” in the sense they have recently searches for it or visited a site of a kitchen manufacturer that told Facebook. They can target people in country X of a certain age. If that doesn’t sell enough kitchens then just close down me kitchen business or buy a bus stop ad but don’t follow me around the internet.