Targeted advertising, despite its prevalence, is not as beneficial as it seems. It’s predicated on the notion of profiling users, collecting data, and making assumptions about their preferences. This approach is flawed; it often leads to incorrect assumptions and can alienate users. Furthermore, it’s invasive, infringing upon users’ privacy.

The practice of profiling also contributes to the creation of ‘filter bubbles’, where users are only exposed to content that aligns with their perceived preferences. This limits exposure to diverse perspectives and can reinforce existing biases.

Moreover, targeted advertising is not necessarily more effective than non-targeted advertising. While it may lead to short-term engagement, it doesn’t necessarily result in long-term customer loyalty.

The industry’s reliance on targeted advertising is also problematic. It creates a market where companies are incentivised to collect as much data as possible, often without the explicit consent of users. This raises serious ethical and legal concerns.

Ultimately, the harms of targeted advertising outweigh its benefits. It’s invasive, can lead to incorrect assumptions, and contributes to the creation of filter bubbles. It’s also not necessarily more effective and raises serious ethical and legal concerns. Alternatives, such as contextual advertising, should be explored.

Go to source article: