Submitted by davetowers646 t3_10p1kb3 in news
Comments
thought_first t1_j6intz2 wrote
> allegations the social media giant abused its dominant position to monetise users’ personal data
That is their entire business model. Not sure what they are defending against here.
1QAte4 t1_j6j0j97 wrote
This is the business model of most social media companies and I don't know what the alternative would be except making people pay subscriptions to use sites.
Borninthewagon t1_j6jqhya wrote
Not a business expert, but I don't believe you need to gather and sell people's personal data in order to sell advertising on your site.
Aazadan t1_j6jydka wrote
You don’t, but to generate targeted ad’s as well as content feedback loops which in turn get you more targeted ad’s does require personal data.
PsecretPseudonym t1_j6o1kds wrote
Nope. Content-based targeting (e.g., AdWords, originally) doesn’t need to know anything about the user.
Aazadan t1_j6o97y0 wrote
Which is a completely different type of targeting. That’s targeting people based on a product they’re looking at not something like “show this ad, to men between 30 and 40, who have gotten a car repair within the past 60 days”.
PsecretPseudonym t1_j6pcdam wrote
Yes, “different type of targeting” means you can still do targeting. Just not user-specific targeting. In many situations contextual targeting is actually far more effective (e.g., search ads have performed incredibly well even prior to much use of personal user info/history, because keywords searched at the time of search represent by far the most valuable piece of information to select the highest expected value ad).
[deleted] t1_j6khh6s wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j6kmvxz wrote
[removed]
DeNoodle t1_j6jwv6h wrote
But to make money from selling advertising on your site you do.
Detachabl_e t1_j6kgaw0 wrote
It's not the monetization, it's the abuse of it's dominant position. In other words, there should be 5 or 6 little facebooks all vying for our data.
mopsyd t1_j6iogs5 wrote
The fine money of course
[deleted] t1_j6jeiz8 wrote
[removed]
A_Snips t1_j6k8rmy wrote
If only there was an organization where countries could band together to set rules and laws to fight off giant worldwide corporations.
theb0tman t1_j6lhukm wrote
Some kind of league of nations?
[deleted] t1_j6hvopn wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j6hvymw wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j6i3k56 wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j6iyes6 wrote
[deleted]
[deleted] t1_j6jyuby wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j6k5xby wrote
[removed]
[deleted] t1_j6k8aqk wrote
[removed]
Canadiancrazy1963 t1_j6kyssb wrote
Suckerberger needs to be sued out of existence.
[deleted] t1_j6llul8 wrote
[removed]
frealfr t1_j6jqkpz wrote
I would seek to block such an action as well.
SynchroField2 t1_j6ldiuw wrote
Yeah once it gets above 3 billion i start blocking
[deleted] t1_j6no97u wrote
[removed]
ITriedLightningTendr t1_j6i29cx wrote
Using dominance to block claim of dominance