I found your article interesting on several levels. However, with my non-tech/limited IT background, I wanted to pose a few thoughts from a basic consumer/marketer’s standpoint.

It sounds to me that the government is trying to over-regulate the internet? You gave the example of the BT Company and articles on running. Well, when I watch any TV program, assumptions about my preferences, demographic, interests, etc. have been made. That’s why I see commercials for Home Depot and Chevy trucks when I watch home improvement or landscaping shows.

Yet, I don’t hear consumer groups complaining that my privacy has been breached, that companies are unfairly targeting me based on my actions or assumed behaviors. Why the discrepancy?

Just like TV, I have to pay to access the internet (in one form or another). The content on the internet doesn’t magically appear online; companies and individuals have to invest time and money into creating relevant content. Just like a TV show.

So I guess the dotted-line, vague connection I’m making is that the internet, like TV, exists for profit. That profit motive is disguised as entertainment, education, and more, but it’s still there. TV wouldn’t exist without advertisers willing to fit the bill. Likewise, would You Tube be able to accommodate all of its user content if it wasn’t generating advertising revenue? How else could it afford the software, servers, etc that are necessary to handle its overwhelming amount of content?

Why should the internet be hindered by excessive legislation making it increasingly difficult for legitimate companies to advertise their wares and win customers?

I think the danger of the FTC’s involvement is that they’ll scare away the advertisers by making the Internet too costly a tool. If that happens, what becomes of our beloved Internet? Doesn’t all that fantastic content, from funny You Tube videos to up-to-the nanosecond news and information, disappear?