Cambridge Analytica was an experiment run by a marketing team. I wouldn't say marketing will always side on ethics.

Propaganda is, and always has been, a subset of marketing aimed at shifting public perception. It would be wild to assume it never happens.

▲ JumpCrisscross 6 hours ago | parent [-]

> Cambridge Analytica was an experiment run by a marketing team. I wouldn't say marketing will always side on ethics

The argument isn't against ethics. It's about self interest. Amazon bought the Super Bowl ad to sell Nest units.

"Unwitting" is correct. There are no lizard people coordinating our march towards dystopia. Just individual people who will–like me–read this article, think we should do more, and then probably do nothing.

(If you want a realistic conspiracy, Amazon may have greenlit the spot with an eye towards an audience of one or two in D.C.)

	▲	shakna 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I do not see the difference, between influencing policy by targetting "one or two", or a greater mass of people. Both serve the same goals, in a different manner. Both require the same choices by marketing - active and with conscience aforethought.
	▲	areoform 5 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		`There are no lizard people coordinating our march towards dystopia. Just individual people who will–like me–read this article, think we should do more, and then probably do nothing.` There doesn't have to be an explicit conspiracy for a conspiracy to emerge. Conspiracies can be spontaneous, organic emergent behavior. For example, the killing of Ken McElroy; an entire community decided to spontaneously kill someone and then decided to cover up the crime collectively (and - also - spontaneously) - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_McElroy It's very much possible for people to brand the surveillance state as cute; and for consent for a surveillance state to spontaneously emerge / be generated from the attempts of marketers trying to make the Ring dystopia cute.