• by Joe Mandese  @mp_joemandese, October 2, 2014

Joseph Turow, Robert Lewis Shayon Professor, Annenberg School of Communication, University of Pennsylvania, just gave a great example of the problems with targeting consumers based on their online behavioral data: That it often doesn’t deliver the primary benefit that the industry tells consumers they will reap, more relevant targeting.

As an example, Turow cited research conducted that showed 86% of consumers did not want political ads targeted at them. The problem, he said, is that the “poltical media guys” said “tough luck.”

Speaking during the “Does The ‘Audience’ Have A Say?’ session at OMMA RTB, Turow said its often a fallacy that consumers are getting the most relevant ad targeting, at least from the consumer’s perspective.

For example, he cited what might happen if a consumer responded to something asking whether they were interested in bicycles. Turow said the consumer might expect to get ads for bicycles as a result of that, but the reality is that ad technology data scientists might use that response as a signal for targeting entirely different things to the consumer that they never had an intention for.

The end result, he said, is ads targeted at them end up feeling “creepy,” which creates distrust, anxiety, and makes the consumer feel like they’ve lost their “dignitity.”

Even worse, he said, is their fear that such targeting might be a form of “discrimination,” because for all the products, services and deals targeted at them, they also realize that means a corresponding number of deals are not.