Well considering they completely butchered their GDPR compliance to leverage said data overseas w.r.t digital audiences (they just had to pull out) I'd guess they would like the idea of more activity data, but don't have much confidence they'll get much value from it.
Just bc data doesn't leave the platform doesn't mean they are not selling products with it baked in. Maybe it's semantics, but if you buy an audience to target based on data that FB is capturing, you are buying user data.
The distinction people have been using in this thread is "buying eyeballs" vs. "buying user data." And it's a meaningful distinction; I might trust FB to show me an ad microtargeted at employees of my company, but I don't trust every advertiser to know what company I work for.
It's more than a semantic difference. Buying user data means you are purchasing data. That is not what is happening here.
When you purchase data, it can be remixed and resold, can be used outside the original terms of service agreed to between FB/Google and their users. This is difficult to enforce agreed upon protections, and is a troubling issue (e.g. Cambridge Analytica had user data they used in a "clearly wrong" manner -- a problem that AFAIK was from 3 years ago and has since been shut down).
Buying access to the users means an advertiser is purchasing the ability to put a message in front of the user. This data is covered by user agreements, and is much harder for third parties to use in a "clearly wrong" manner. This data must be deleted at the request of the user, and can be (relatively) easily deleted by going to the original source (a key distinction -- it's very hard to delete data that has been sold and resold).
It is important to use the correct description of what is happening. On FB, you're not "buying an audience" so much as "defining an audience to reach". You don't get to hold the user data in a csv; you get to put messages in front of groups of people. You don't possess the data -- you have access to use it through a user interface provided by FB/Google.
I respect that you may feel FB/Google holding these user data is unethical. Other people feel the exchange is perfectly fine. Regardless, using precise language is important to not muddy the waters, especially in such a tendentious debate.
Who is the hypothetical you in the second to last paragraph? You are assuming one scenario, that of a brand or agency planner, who is creating a media plan with audience builder or w/e the name is these days.
Saying or assuming that no tech companies sell user data is disingenuous. Case in point, doesn't Edmunds have an exclusive data contract to share data with Oracle Data Cloud?
An advertiser, in the 2nd to last paragraph. I'm only assuming the facts in evidence -- that FB and Google aren't selling user data. They sell advertisements, which use user data for targeting via generally broad mechanisms or 1st party data.
Re-reading my comment, I don't think I said anything about companies in general.
Ehhh, the 'collect it to use internally' is a bit inaccurate. While not literally saying 'here buyer is user data that we are offering to sell you' Facebook, Google, and every other platform do sell user-derived data to advertisers in the form of native audiences or other targeting products. 'Oh you want to to serve ads to individuals that shop at Uniqlo? Here's a list of profiles to target that have checked into a Uniqlo three times in the past 6 weeks'. 'New-Parents? here are inds that have dwelled on babies-r-us (I have no idea if they still exist) or clicked to learn more about a stroller ad that was served in their Instagram feed'.
It's not 'here's all the activity data about Anthony Mouse', and user data is collected internally, but it is also baked into targeting products that they sell to brands and agencies.
"Oh you want to to serve ads to individuals that shop at Uniqlo? Here's a list of profiles to target that have checked into a Uniqlo three times in the past 6 weeks"
No, this is not true. It's more like "Oh you want to to serve ads to individuals that shop at Uniqlo? Give us your ad creative and we will show you to the profiles that have checked into a Uniqlo three times in the past 6 weeks"
Additionally, at FB ads, often it's custom audience, and in that case it's "Oh you want to to serve ads to individuals that shop at Uniqlo? Give us your ad creative and list of email addresses of people you want to target and we show them your ads." (though you can actually do "similar audience" and so on.
This was a hearing with Zuckerberg. What evidence do you have that suggests she has no problem with phone companies? You hastily generalize a conclusion with little to no data to support it.
It absolutely does. An ex-boss of mine who tried for years got himself on one of these lists and it took a lot of effort and resources just so he could bring it up in every introduction call/meeting he made to clients.
Does the same hold true if you put replace "read three..." with "research"? Perhaps it's specific to my industry (data), but I spend a considerable amount of time reading about new techniques and approaches to make our codestack more efficient.
