That ........."The Internet needs to be free", is so understandable.
The American Ambassador on Q&A | Q&A | ABC TV
But as Yahoo! have already proven (in my own situation), it will only be as "free" as the site (control - or, moderation), allows it to be.
Or, as free as any site chooses to portray itself (to user's who may only be 'visiting') or, that will allow it's 'user/s' or, 'active member' to be. With certain, strictly applied limitations. (Again, as in my case with Yahoo!).
A site, that provided you only post the "thoughts" that are fully aligned with the 'agenda' of those that control (or, moderate), each site, all is ok. Yahoo! (like China) permits/enforces (or, allows a practice of), "thought control". Or, what basically is, nothing short of being the control of people's opinion.
This issue of Behavioral Targeting, just won't go away. And why should it do so? Read on and I'll tell you why it shouldn't, too.
As users of the internet, we really need to realise that the use of the word "FILTER" is none other than saying, CENSOR. (It's just a nicer way of putting it.)
The perfect example is here and with the newly announced advertising for Twitter, in it's "Promoted Tweets" ......
The BBC commented, as below: (I'll let you be the 'judge')
< Of critical important to marketers, the ads will be a way for companies to enter the conversation when, [for] as The Times says, "it turns negative." (To date, select companies have created tools to measure sentiment on Twitter, but until now, businesses could do little with that information.)
More important to Twitter, however, is how users respond to the advertising.
.....Apart from a good 'ol fashioned user backlash, "If Promoted Tweets prove unpopular with users, [then] rival application developers may offer products that filter them out," suggests The BBC.>
Whaaaaaat? Use -a product .... "that FILTERS them out"?
Its all so simple. Just CENSOR (I mean, "Filter") all such (of those) "anti messengers" and do it (in many cases), during the full course of a/any campaign from their IP address, the source. That'll help to fix the problem, that's for sure. And a "new" industry of (a little 'G&C') protection type revenues coming in via marketers, for 'lucky' publishers & tracking Co's, etc
So in any democracy, the Govt of the day only need to pay internet Co's (like LOOK), to ban post/posters against their policies during the period leading right up to an election, right? Now that's what you call, 'full blown' Fascism at it's peak.
By 'scrubbing out' those who are against them (by filtering them), from their posting of anti Govt messages, life becomes so much easier. The media have been 'paid-off' before today, too. A clear example of such was the Joe Cocker "Unchain my Heart" - the GST 'intro' campaign (here in Australia), where the Howard Government is said to have allocated $420 million to explain the new tax system in the lead up to the introduction of the GST way back in 2000. (A huge 'spend' of taxpayer's money to help with, the 'winning of the day').
And it's all, no different to (what still is) the old fashioned vetting of 'letters to the editor', that have always been censored. (Filtered)
They can do lots more with "BT" (behavioral targeting) for political causes. Think of democratically held elections, for starters. When (for the dollars), Internet Co's with scale to much prized individual's IP addys ('geo-located' within those marginal electoral boundaries), political parties (certainly, here in OZ) will be lining up to 'feed' on, the lush of taxpayer's money.
< Information Collection
We do not record any personal information through the Site.
The Site does use tracking data and information obtained through cookies and other technologies to analyze visitor traffic patterns and Site usage trends. This data is not used to identify any specific visitor.
The Site monitors visitor traffic patterns by logging tracking data, which is collected automatically from each Site visitor.
Tracking data may include information such as the IP address of the visitor's computer, its general geographic location, its browser type and operating system, the referring site, when the Site was visited and how much time was spent on the Site, which pages of the Site were visited and the order in which they were visited, which links were clicked, and past usage of the Site.
Well may we 'save the trees' but (with the Internet and new-age media Co's), the more things change, the more they will stay the same. With the permitted use of (ho-hum) "Filtering", it certainly (most definitely), appears that way, to me.
Disclosure: Long LOOK and happy to be so.