Maltimore is a user on You can follow them or interact with them if you have an account anywhere in the fediverse. If you don't, you can sign up here.
Maltimore @Maltimore

So the targeted-ads-industry is expected to lose 60% of revenue due to . Of course this means massive loss of jobs. And people seem to be genuinely sad about this, even privacy minded people, even lots of people on mastodon. And I just don't get it. If you are working for the targeted ads industry, you're working for the wrong side. I'm not going to be sad for you. Especially in tech, where it's comparatively easy to find work, there's no excuse for going there.

· Tusky · 19 · 19

@Maltimore (I don't doubt it, I just want a source.)

@emsenn some other answers in this thread are indicative of that :)

@Maltimore I'm sorry, but when I click this toot, I only see responses sharing opinions, not a source. Could you please share it with me?

@emsenn ah sorry, you meant a source on that the targeted ads industry is supposed to lose 60% in revenue?
I got that from a German podcast (2nd last episode of "Lage der Nation"), and they in turn were quoting some study that I can't remember unfortunately :(

@Maltimore it depends, or have you heard that some people don't get to choose their jobs but have to do anything they are offered because they have children to feed and bills to pay? the system that facilitates all of this is to blame and not the people in the first place. /cc @kensanata

@steckerhalter @Maltimore Changing jobs is hard and there is hardship all over the world. People working in adtech will suffer for sure and that makes me sad, yes. But they worked in adtech, tracking me, selling my data to the highest bidder, circumventing my blockers, inventing permanent cookies, exploiting the bugs in my browsers, the have been real and active enemies of my online life for a great many years and for this evil intent and callousness I shudder in disgust.

@kensanata I'm not saying it is good, I'm saying the system is all wrong that makes this business thrive @Maltimore

@kensanata @Maltimore @steckerhalter

I don't feel sorry for the adtech folk losing their job.

Advertising, in particular adtech, is something that you get into deliberately. It's a competitive, ego-driven industry.

In high school and first year university, I actually really wanted to get into advertising, initially from an art direction side but into the adtech stuff. I was part of an industry association group where we invited various adtech CEOs, exec, etc to come and speak.

When I attended an advertising awards night as a second year uni student, that was when I decided that this wasn't an industry for me. People who went about celebrating because they won an 'innovation' award for doing soap commercials. Or times when I told teams to make a logo 1mm smaller or else I won't approve it.

Advertising is competitive, and it's not a type of industry that someone gets into because they 'need a job'. People in that industry know exactly what they are getting into and they're into it for the money, the perks and prestige in being an 'adman'. I know this - because I was on the other side in advertising/marketing. I no longer wanted to be a part of what kensata talks about which is why I switched away.

@hcs I feel sorry for this whole mess we are in and the people who have to suffer from it on every side @kensanata @Maltimore

@steckerhalter @Maltimore @kensanata

Suffering is an overstatement. It is just a landscape change, in the same way that the advent of social media, adtech, etc was a landscape change for ad people living in the world of TV ads and billboards, or when marketing became less about printing out flyers and more about handling data.

Here's a post of how there may be a tactic change from the advertising world:

>> Start Post <<<
And secondly, in a world where third-party channels and publishers are offering unreliable experiences (and unreliable content) to consumers, and may well be using their channels to ask for consent to collect consumer data themselves, it starts to make sense for brands to distance themselves. This could mean increasing use of owned media channels – where brands can control both the content and the way they ask for consent. Put simply, in a world that has been characterised for a long time by dodgy practice, content feels like an ideal way for brands to start to rebuild trust.
>> End Post <<

The reason why we got into this is because things have gone unchecked for too long. Ad people are motivated by getting that pay raise for having good metrics or for having the best only mobile advertising campaign (and by the way, I was judge for one of those awards!). Ad people don't get compensated for protecting people's data, they get compensated for how well a campaign does. There is little motivation or compensation in having good considerations for people's privacy which is either a second-class or a no-class citizen. The only people that kept things in check where departments like IT acting as data protection owners or law. The only way for things to try to balance itself out is via something like this legislation, places like anti-spam laws, regulation watchdogs, and so on.

Many people in this field have jumped on the gravy train because there is a lot of money in it. There is no shortage of articles in the adtech industry talking about data protection as well. And, advertising crosses over to many other disciplines. It is not exactly a specialization that someone jumps into and they realize that they are stuck there forever.

@hcs I was sort of lamenting the mess we are in in general and feeling with the millions of people that suffer from the current system. The ad business is just one head of this hydra. What we need to do IMO is to change the whole system from the inside out instead of chopping heads off the hydra (legislation etc.). I have a plan for this and if you want I can ellaborate. I agree with your points, but what I'm getting at is much more fundamental. @Maltimore @kensanata

@steckerhalter @kensanata @Maltimore I see, may have misread it also.

What is wrong with the legislation?

@hcs Nothing really, it's how the current system tries to counter developments it deems harmful. But that's exactly what I think is wrong with the system. Instead of controlling the system, the system controls us. You wouldn't have to radiate cancer cells if the body would function properly. You wouldn't need legislation if the "body" would not always work against the common good. @kensanata @Maltimore

@steckerhalter @hcs @Maltimore After your last comment I figured you were talking about the woes of capitalism in general but if you have a more specific plan, I’m interested in hearing more about it!