When advertising is done poorly, it can be grating. It is intrusive and annoying. When it is done slightly better, it can be even more annoying. People feel violated. When advertising is done well, it seems wonderful. Professor Moglen gave the example of someone offering us our favorite pizza slice at exactly the right time. Two hundred years ago, such good service could only be obtained through a very attentive butler.

There are so many products out there that I would love if only I knew about them. I would love to be provided with information about all of these free software alternatives. I would love to know about that new and delicious microwave popcorn. In fact, I would use a browser if it tracked my information, the websites I visit and the e-mails I wrote if it introduced me to products that I wanted to buy. Advertising would not be an annoyance, but a feature the way that it is a feature for those types of people who read the NYTimes Real Estate section, various electronic product magazines or www.fatwallet.com. Perhaps over time, producers could use this information to make even better products for me. Three hundred years ago, such good service could only be obtained through a privately commissioned artisan.

This might be a bit eerie. Perhaps it would allow Gates, Jobs and Murdoch to exert a large amount of social influence. Their politics are not my politics. This might be very bad for liberty, but it would be weighed against the benefit of lots of wonderful products.

-- StevenWu - 22 Oct 2009

This might be very bad for liberty, but it would be weighed against the benefit of lots of wonderful products.

You have unwittingly managed to succinctly identify the quintessential trouble of the current age: freedom is not valued. At least not to any meaningful extent if it is easily superseded by "lots of wonderful products".

This is the insurmountable obstacle faced by those who try to fight for human freedom. This is what has wearied them, made them disillusioned. This is what would make even victory hollow. For what gift do you bestow on someone who does not value it? How can there be solidarity if you spurn dignity?

-- ElidedElided - 22 Oct 2009

If one wants to act as an advocate for freedom and privacy in “our current age,” then it is entirely self-defeating to state that “freedom is not valued.” Companies like Facebook and Google, which are in the data mining business, want to be able to freely appropriate data regarding personal preferences and sell it for a profit. This business model turns on the false notion that “kids these days don’t value privacy.” As a result, perpetuating this notion is an all too perfect way for putative privacy advocates to defeat themselves.

Steven’s post asked a simple question: “Is the cost of giving away data regarding my personal preferences outweighed by the benefits that accrue to me as a consumer if I do?” In my mind, this is not an altogether easy question to answer.

-- StephenClarke - 22 Oct 2009

ElidedElided? , it was not "unwitting" and I hope that it is not "insurmountable." I agree with Stephen that "this is not an altogether easy question to answer." I am conflicted. I don't know how I feel about freedom or even what freedom means in this situation. I like things, particularly things tailor-made for people like me. I like pluralism and equality. I think pluralism and equality might be sacrificed by these forms of advertising.

-- StevenWu - 22 Oct 2009