This seems:
Good for megacorps who don't need targeting and can be pay less for ads.
Bad for small/niche advertisers who do need targeting.
Neutral for the vast majority of consumers who don't appear to care about tracking.
Good for megacorps who don't need targeting and can be pay less for ads.
Bad for small/niche advertisers who do need targeting.
Neutral for the vast majority of consumers who don't appear to care about tracking.
No concern at all about the adverse effects on democracies of the misuse of data?
Also you are assuming you can have 'same' service after banning targeting. That remains to be seen.
Also, you could consider disagreeing without being rude.
Once they have to stop they will have to actually put effort in making contextual advertising work. Imagine a local business sponsoring a related Facebook page. Or buying ads for declared interests.
It can work but the big parties don't want it to. Because they've invested billions in building their market advantage in targeted.
Once contextual advertising once again becomes the best option because targeted ads are banned, it will be worth the full price again.
Also, I think it will in fact work better. There's no point showing cosmetics ads on a tech site to a guy like me just because I bought eau de toilette last week. Really no point because I buy one bottle of the same stuff every few years. Any contextual ads that that site would have shown would have more relevance to me. Real world example.