The goal of any advertising service is to match people with relevant ads, and collecting data is a major part of how you do that. That’s what the author is referring to.
The goal of any advertising service is fully automated population-scale digital pimping, with an extremely sophisticated matchmaking service (backed by all that data) as a value-add.
They put your ass on the RTB street to turn tricks. You get mindfucked by--and maybe catch some viruses from--any John who wants to take a crack at you. In return, you get this nice cheap TV/Youtube/Gmail/article.
Bitch better have my money!
People are not matched with "relevant ads" due to their interests, it is due to the advertisers interest in your demographics.
(also, the writer might be hedging his bets with ads/advertisers on his page)
I dislike this game where we mince words like it changes the fundamental argument. The two crowds want to be linked up in a way that transfers money most happily from consumers to producers. Unhappy purchases are likely to result in returns. Of course, if one advertiser can keep your returns below a certain rate (or won’t cause them to explode), that’s more ideal, so naturally the market will select for companies that do this unless they have some other incredible metrics outweighing that.
Really the only time this isn’t true is with companies designed around maximal waste - products are often too cheap to bother returning and are only meant to last a use or two anyways.