To Save the News, We Must Shatter Ad-Tech

Great article however the deeper problem is this bubble actually started way before RTB was common place. I’m referring to how one simple phrase “if it bleeds it leads” realized the full power of shock. In modern time this was applied to every other emotion under the sun with the VAD model (valence, arousal, dominance).

Most forward thinkers are finally understanding memetics, classical conditioning, and the feverish cycle of media consumption that never fulfills. Smart people are turning a blind eye to the blatant manipulation of thought.

So yes, it’s very obvious the sub issue of antitrust needs to be addressed but not without addressing the root issue as well. We have reached peak valence, arousal, and dominance with media and prioritizing ones mental health over this addiction is key to productivity and success.

- This is well written.

- I agree with almost every line, which is no surprise because I cannot recall ever disagreeing with the EFF

- ...Except for this line: "That’s good for everyone. Giving publishers their fair share of ad revenue means they won’t have to plaster their websites with content-obscuring ads. Reducing costs for advertisers means that goods can be sold more cheaply." It's not good for Meta and Google, and not good for whoever they are going to lobby. They have spoken up about wanting "regulation" so that they can follow ground rules without compromising competitiveness, but I don't really buy that.