You're more forgiving than I am. As far as I'm concerned, individual-targeted advertising has such inherently perverse incentives that even those starting out with good intentions (e.g. consensual opt-in) will eventually find themselves engaged in unethical, privacy-eroding behavior as a matter of course.
Consider what would happen if you outlawed individual-targeted advertising. Ad relevancy falls overall. What then?
Would ad companies like Google make less money? Not really. Overall advertising budgets are not dominated by the effectiveness of advertising, but by adversarial spending by their competitors. Companies have to spend money on ads because the competition is spending money on ads. It doesn't matter how absolutely effective the campaign is, as long as it's relatively more effective than your rival's.
Would consumers spend less money? No, a consumer has a budget that is independent of the relevancy of the ads they see.
The advertising industry thrived for a long time in the absence of individual user tracking. It could do so again.
Consider what would happen if you outlawed individual-targeted advertising. Ad relevancy falls overall. What then?
Would ad companies like Google make less money? Not really. Overall advertising budgets are not dominated by the effectiveness of advertising, but by adversarial spending by their competitors. Companies have to spend money on ads because the competition is spending money on ads. It doesn't matter how absolutely effective the campaign is, as long as it's relatively more effective than your rival's.
Would consumers spend less money? No, a consumer has a budget that is independent of the relevancy of the ads they see.
The advertising industry thrived for a long time in the absence of individual user tracking. It could do so again.