[mola]

Would you have bought these items otherwise? If the answer is no, then you were "sucked in".

Google AdWords was great, you search for product X you definitely wanted to buy X, that's reasonable personalization.

Now they want to know who you are, so they can optimize manipulatating you to want X even if you didn't before you saw their ad.

There's a big difference between the two type of advertising, although they're both personalized. One is aligning stake holders interest, the other forms an adversarial dynamics.

Of course, in reality, these are the two ends of a spectrum, I dichotomized it to make my point clearer.

[braythwayt]

I question the words "sucked in." Influenced is more appropriate.

Before VisiCalc was invented by Frankston and Bricklin, nobody wanted it. Many people had the problem it solved, but nobody knew it existed, so they didn't go looking to buy it.

Advertising and public relations (see PG's essay "the Submarine") influenced people to buy it. A lot of those folks were people whose businesses improved after buying it, which is why "spreadsheets" went on to become one of the most important product categories of its age.

I think the difference between "influenced" and "manipulated" has to do with informed consent. An ad, clearly marked as such, influences. Advertorials masquerading as independent opinion, paying influencers to use a product to generate faux social proof, manipulating social media algorithms to make it appear as if a preponderance of people you know share a particular viewpoint...

That's all manipulation because the recipient is either completely unaware of what is going on, or dark patterns are used to make it difficult for them to discover what is going on.

But using keywords to target people and then giving them an ad that is clearly labeled as an ad? I think that's just influence.

[ptest1]

None of the items were life or death essentials. These were things like protein cookies, pet-themed gifts, exercise equipment, etc. I wouldn’t have bought them if I never saw the ads.

But wanting and needing are different things. I wouldn’t consider it manipulation to show me something I might be interested in that I wouldn’t have known about otherwise. For instance, I just discovered (via ads) the galaxy night light trend and I’m now thinking it might be fun to get one.

[srtjstjsj]

That's a completely false comparison. just because you want something doesn't mean (a) you need it or (b) the stuff being advertised suits your need.

When you want something, it just means someone else already advertised it to you.

Advertising is merely a tool. The value of products is what matters.

[XCSme]

I think that "sucked in" shouldn't be confused to awareness.

There is one thing to manipulate someone into buying something and a different thing to just point to the existence of that product.