Targeting is a piece of the puzzle. As an advertiser I need frequency capping, brand safety, page quality, geo, etc. Ignoring all that.. I still need to measure results.
Yet somehow advertising existed for decades without being able to completely track the full path from viewed ad to purchase.
Seriously, the completely f'd up view of advertisers ("Ads won't work unless I can basically track everything about you!!") shows how bonkers the world has become. If your job can't exist without in-depth tracking of how a shown ad influences purchasing behavior, maybe your job shouldn't exist.
Seriously, ads would work plenty well enough by just showing the same ads to all users based on the contents of the page (or search query). Honestly, I'd be all for a legal framework that completely outlaws any "personalization" on the internet unless a user clearly and optionally opts in.
I mean.. so did medicine, buying stuff from the store, and social interaction. That doesn’t mean we stopped innovation when it went slightly awry.
Medicine works well enough with leeches, why would improve that.
There is a path to achieving similar adtech outcomes that are privacy focused, and that is what google is trying to accomplish. Why hate something that is trying to achieve what you want?
How about this: Every user, when setting up a new device, gets a clearly displayed option as to whether or not they want to be shown personalized ads based on the tracking of their browser history. Basically, a clearly displayed "Yes, I want to be tracked for the purposes of showing me ads" option. How many people do you think with want to opt in if they really had the choice? Heck, why do you think Facebook is going so bananas over Apple just asking people to opt-in to tracking?
The only 'innovation' going on is making the tracking difficult for your average, non-technical person to (a) know what is going on and (b) how to opt-out.