I think one thing users need to always keep in mind is that goods and services are rarely ever “free.” If you’re walking down a street and a man sitting at a booth stops you and asks if you would like free football tickets, you would most definitely ask what the catch was. He might reply something about wanting you to tour a condo facility in exchange. Websites like Facebook are providing a service and in a capitalist economy, that would not be possible without some way generate income. Even something simple that we take for granted like Google search is the same way. Both of these web services generate income through advertising and that advertising is tailored to users based on their behavior. So just like walking down the street, when surfing the web consumers should always ask about that catch. For some, taking an hour to tour the condos would be well worth the tickets and for others it would not be. Just like for some, viewing a few tailored ads is not so bad compared to having free access to social networking or search engines. Most would rather do that than pay a dime every time they punched something into Google, or posted a picture on Facebook. It’s all about being informed and making choices that suit your personal goals and interests.

The question of ethical limits of online marketing is an interesting one. I agree with Justin’s statement that “for some, viewing a few tailored ads is not so bad compared to having free access to social networking or search engines.” Just as with anything in life, it’s an exchange of cost versus benefit. When you watch network television, you have to endure commercials. When you opt for DVR services so you can skip those commercials, you pay a fee. Most free and inexpensive media we consume are made possible through advertising.

For online marketing, though, I think the issue has to do less with the “cost” of viewing ads and more with an actual or perceived invasion of privacy. As Dr. Willis referenced in this post, consumers tend not to trust online advertising. I believe that’s because few people understand it. Facebook clarifies, as Vivian quoted, that “We serve the ad to people who meet the criteria the advertiser selected, but we do not tell the advertiser who any of those people are.” Consumers who think there are teams of online computer hackers stealing all of their personal information every time they purchase a purse online simply don’t understand that to marketers, they’re nothing more than a number. There’s really no invasion of privacy because companies get no personal information about the people who interact with their ads. I ran my first Facebook advertisement this week, and I can confirm that advertisers are given very little information about people who see their ads. I know we had 26 clicks in one day, and I know that we targeted our audience based on zip code and age, but that’s all I know. Based on this reality – apart from unusual scenarios like alcohol companies targeting children online – I think online marketing is pretty far from breaching any ethical barriers.

What’s most interesting, to me, about web advertising is how quickly it’s becoming overlooked. Scholar John Vivian notes that, in 2007, Facebook users protested advertisements appearing in news feeds. He says they were worried about privacy issues. For that reason, in 2009, Facebook altered its terms of service to protect its advertising interest and again did so in 2010 (as listed by Dr. Willis). Each time the FB advertising format has been altered, it’s received less attention. That’s because it’s simply becoming the norm–as are other forms of web advertising. Just like we’re used to watching commercials between tv shows, we’re used to watching them during webisodes (if we want to watch them for free). We can’t avoid invasive advertising on news sites either. Ever try looking through photos in an online news gallery? An advertisement usually takes over the screen somewhere in the middle of the gallery. Of course, there are advertisements always lining the right side of the screen on nearly any website, and sometimes lining the left, too. This just adds to ad clutter. Again, though, this clutter, as the norm, can become easily overlooked over time. And, I believe it is. The “noise” is no longer “loud” because it’s just tuned out. It’s happened to all traditional forms of media–newspapers, radio and television. That’s why, advertisers are turning to social media sites that can easily track users, who provide information about themselves by themselves. No real research needed. That’s less of a cost for advertisers, when their audiences are already researching themselves. It makes sense that advertisers would naturally be attracted to the medium. And, as sharing of this information becomes the norm, it will bother users less and less. However, technology will continue to evolve and users will move on to bigger and better things. So, advertisers must never stop looking for new ways to communicate.

I think that one of the main ethical dilemma that comes with websites is that terms of use and privacy policies are written at such length, that sometimes many very important things become convoluted and are not apparent to the average user. Just having the policies written doesn’t meant that the company has informed the users, the policies not only have to be written, they should be easy to find and easy to understand. I like that you mentioned how deep within facebook the privacy policy is – it’s the same for many social networking sites. My brother and I often joke that it’s easier to search google for some of these answers than the sites themselves. One big thing that bothers me about the internet in general is advertising. I understand that advertising is how most of these sites make money, so I’m not against that, it about how they know so much about me and my history. If I am searching for a pair of jeans online, for the next 2 weeks any site I go to will have ads with all of the brands of jeans I looked up – that’s a little scary! When does my privacy kick in on that front? Same with facebook, when I changed my status from single to engaged, my ads went from local clubs and dating sites to wedding photographers and apartments for rent. I don’t like the idea of federal regulation of the internet, but I do think that sites really need to step up their policies and make users feel more safe about the information they share.

The average Facebook user knows his data is being collected. I just gave a presentation on social media to an undergraduate class where I work. I made sure to ask the class, and they all responded affirmatively: they knew their data was being monitored and sold to companies targeting them for advertisements. At a recent family gathering, I asked the same question and all of my relatives (age 50-70, approx.) were completely flabbergasted as I explained the inner-workings of Facebook, a tool they all use. Vivian writes that Facebook is open about the way it collects data, but if you don’t know the tools…

It’s all about media literacy, and for the people who are illiterate, online advertising becomes stealth advertising. Perhaps they aren’t clear on the details, but people are generally aware of how targeted advertising works. (No 65-year old woman questions why Oprah’s O magazine has ads for wine and chocolate and not Craftsman tools.)
I joke about being a professional “Facebook-er,” but it isn’t far from the truth. It seems like Ashley and I have similar job responsibilities. I monitor activity for a number of accounts and create and monitor ads for social media and several “pay per click” accounts. The information I receive as part of that work isn’t really personal. It’s demographic, and it’s aggregated. I can’t even connect one individual user’s demographics. I think most companies try to maintain an ethical boundary between the information they have in their arsenal and using it to gain profits. Advertising pays the bills for most media. There’s no such thing as a free lunch, and that’s something every age group understands.

I mean the entire point of marketing is advertising to consumers so I don’t feel that we should be super surprised about our invasion of privacy. But, I think the nature of advertising and marketing is so intrusive now because its reflective of our culture. We give into so much marketing and advertising that marketers are just pushing the envelope until we push back, our generation loves products, we love to shop and we are lovers of things society is giving us what we want. Its the effects of social construction, we want things so we are sold things, we incorporate our possessions into our identities and so advertisers try and become part of our lives as well. On Facebook and with different social media sites, they work with those companies so that is expected, but we do have the options to not give into that or deal with it, we’re just lazy and won’t read the terms of use and take the precautions necessary.

As users of social sites, I do not think it should come as a total surprise that sites like Facebook have given information out for marketing or advertising. However, being members of social sites we must remember that anything on the internet is in a sense “free” information and actual privacy does not exist. Sure, we as users can set certain settings to maintain some privacy however, a few clicks here and there and your information can be public to anyone. I do agree that marketing and advertisements have become more aggressive. Yet, this particularly reminds me of when telemarketers would constantly call. Now it has manifested into another form which is all online. I believe as a user of social sites, that you should put only enough information, the more information you declare on these sites, the more they will take and vise versa; the less information you put up, the less marketers can work with.

I think this is a really interesting topic. While I see the invasion of privacy in some aspects for various websites passing along info about you. But, if there are going to be adds on the web pages that I visit, I would prefer that they were tailored to my tastes. I have found some really great websites through the adds on the sides of the web pages. Sites that I don’t know if I would have visited without seeing them on a site I already view and trust. Hearing a friend give something a good review definitely makes an impact on my opinion, so does seeing an add on a site I already trust. I don’t click on 80% of the adds I do see, but if something does catch my eye, I don’t think it is a bad thing to see what other sites being suggested to me have to offer.

I think the key to this is being aware that you are the customer. Often times business or advertisements want you to think you are the one making out on some type of deal but in reality it is always your business and your money that they want. Online ads have become in many ways become a a distraction when entering a website but without them these websites would not exist and us users would be very disappointed. I think there is an ethical line when it comes to advertising. Advertisers should be able to promote their product in such a way that consumers will buy it without being ticked. So many times you are almost manipulated to click on ads and end up on websites you never intended to be on in the first place. Consumers must be alert and aware of the ethical issues related to advertising but advertiser should also do what is right and not trick people into buy their products or buying something that they didnt intend to purchase.