I do think that being more upfront and more transparent would be a good thing, there are alot of misconceptions out there.
I did not expect that when I visited cnn.com, after having logged into Facebook a week earlier, Facebook would log which articles I read. There was no reason for me to think that clicking "remember me" when I logged into Facebook also implied "and also remember my browsing history on all of your partner sites."
That's the behavior that pisses me off, not the targeted ads that you mentioned.
(I assume it's obvious why logging a subset of my browsing history without my consent pisses me off, but let me know if that seems odd and I'll explain more.)
The reason it pisses me off is that my browser history reveals things about me that I'd rather keep private. Facebook is taking that from me without my consent. I would feel approximately the same if I discovered they were stealing stuff out of my garage without my consent-- it wasn't part of the deal I thought I agreed to.
Without getting into the details of my particular situation, I'll just say that I have political and religious views that I think are unpopular, and I don't trust the rest of the world to treat me fairly were those views made public. Also, even my views weren't unpopular now, I want to be judged for what I do, not what I read about on the web.
(I should also add that I don't think any of the private stuff that I mentioned is creepy; it's just my private business. For example, I might feel the same way if I were gay and lived in Mauritania (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_in_Mauritania).)
Seem reasonable?
As to who is doing the deception, I think you're right that (in the example we're discussing) cnn.com is being deceptive. That's a good point; I hadn't really considered the complicity of the partner sites.
But in the end, Facebook is producing widgets, building a system to receive data from those widgets, and working with their partners to deploy those widgets. This system of data transmission is in no way obvious to normal people; if I weren't a web developer, I'd just think I was seeing a "like button image," and that's it. That's the part that pisses me off-- I think it's sneaky, not just me complaining about something I originally agreed to.
Just out of curiosity, and assuming you actually have a Facebook account, this really doesn't bother you at all? Should it be obvious to me that buttons I'm not clicking may be transmitting data to other sites?
The good news for me is that I'll probably be dead by then, or at least most of my friends will be, so Facebook will be of no interest to me.
I'm curious about why you describe your belief as idealistic. Specifically, what is ideal, or even good, about Facebook logging a subset of my browsing history? I understand it's potentially profitable for them and their partners, but that's not a benefit to me.
My idealistic view, which is substantially in conflict with yours, I think, would be that Facebook just serve me targeted ads and forget about the rest of it. Why would your ideal future be better? (I'm assuming you don't work for Facebook or one of their partners.)
I never want to meet you, if you see nothing wrong with snooping around my life and sharing all my secrets with everyone.
It's harmful because it's abusive.
Next year they will want more revenue, so how deeper will they go for that, will they break my windows open and storm the house?
I know it's an exageration, but it ilustrates my point.
In your example, those people breaking into your home is wrong. Watching you when you are in public or on their property would not be.
It does happen without the knowledge of many people today, and the surprise when they find out what's really going on has led to a lot of backlash, but the solution to that is to educate people better about technology and what it can do, not to limit technology so that it can only do things the average person can conceive of.
What about the people who haven't signed up to Facebook, but who still have data about them logged? I see nothing mutual about that relationship.
I'm not a heavy Facebook user, but what you said certainly does not apply to google.
What was once unobtrusive ads now are just ads cleverly disguised as search results in a very faint slightly different background-color box. They wanna pass the ads down as search results and that certainly impacts user experience.
These guys are wise enough not simply through the ads in there altogether, they let you grow accostumed, than just enlarge then a slight bit every now and then. That is not a mutually beneficial relationship, that's an abusive relationship.
1) Oh, what a cool service! For free!
2) Huh, they're showing me ads for stuff I'm interested in... what's up with that. Oh! They're selling "me" to these companies! OMG! Privacy!!!
3) Ah... well if I know exactly what they are and are not selling, and I get the free service, I guess that makes sense and I'm ok with it. It beats paying, and I do like using it.