Is it worse to be distracted by irrelevant ads, or to be monitored closely enough that the ads are accurate but creepy? Why choose? [...] One company called Cambridge Analytica has managed to apply what some are calling a "weaponized AI propaganda machine" in order to visit both fates upon us at once. And it's all made possible by Facebook.

Cambridge Analytica specializes in the mass manipulation of thought. One way they accomplish this is through social media, particularly by deploying "native advertising." Otherwise known as sponsored content, these are ads designed to fool you into assimilating the ad unchallenged. The company also uses Facebook as a platform to push microtargeted posts to specific audiences, looking for the tipping point where someone's political inclination can be changed, just a little bit, for the right price. Much like Facebook games designed specifically for their addictive potential, rather than for any entertainment value, these intellectual salesmen exist solely to hit every sub-perceptual lever in order to bypass our conscious barriers.

[...] Microtargeting [is] the idea that Alice the Advertiser can accurately change the mind of Bob the Buyer based on information Alice can buy. The notion of microtargeting is not itself new, but what Cambridge Analytica is doing with it is novel. They're using the Facebook ecosystem because it perfectly enables the goal of targeting individuals and using their longer-lasting personality characteristics like a psychological GPS. It all hinges on a Facebook advertising tool called "unpublished posts." Among advertisers, these are simply called dark posts.