The framing of the situation is kind of twisted imo.
If we talking about politics, it seems entirely reasonable that a politician would want know what their constituents were thinking about, would tell their constituents what the constituents wanted to here and go to Washington and do what they promised. That's democracy - obviously, this democracy isn't in very good shape. But it's hard claim to that having a very fined-grained understanding of a constituency's wants is the thing that is destroying American democracy. I would lie it's more simply "lies and demagoguery". Now, it seems like Trump undoubtedly used data to fine-tune his demagoguery but I think we have to look elsewhere that data-access to explain the problem. Or - the problem with American democracy isn't groups have fragmented to many, many sub-constituencies but that significant portion of these have palpably irrational views (anti-vaxers, pizza-gate, etc).
That's problem for our democratic system. That degredation of education might be to blame. The destruction of the safety net might be to blame. Or the willingness of mainstream media to engage in propagandistic approaches equally as manipulative as the extreme right might be to blame - and that bring the point that complaints about Cambridge Analytica in a broader context seem entirely in this propagandistic stream, shifting the focus of attention and packaging a vague threat rather than giving any coherent analysis.
I'd agree with the degradation of education system you brought up but even well educated people are prone to being nudged. In the past there was a diversity of competing news reporting. In the U.S. there has been massive consolidation in ownership of media. The sources of information are becoming fewer and the targeting of information is causing people to exist in news bubbles.
As you point out we have anit-vaxers, pizza-gate, etc. and I think this is the result of people existing in news bubbles. Curated content designed to maximize dopamine, anger, fear, etc. This makes it easier to manipulate. Think of all the people who got angry, fearful when Obama suggested having talks with Kim Jon Un and who now are happy that Trump has suggested holding talks with Kim Jon Un. People are prone to this sort of hypocrisy. They most likely aren't even aware of it.
I'm not opposed to gaining a fine-grained understanding of constituent needs as such. What I do oppose is a fine grained understanding of constituent needs so that a message can be crafted to increase the chance that a policy gets enacted when that policy has nothing to do with constituent needs. The information does not appear to being used for the good but rather for the enrichment, empowerment of well connected people.
The public at large is an informational battleground in which the victor achieves power. We are pawns in a game and the purpose is not the public good. This is dangerous if people don't realize this.
Actually, as an owner of the specialized website, I can tell you that blatant invasion of privacy actually destroys publishers. Regional newspaper literary competes with YouTube and apps for advertising dollars, and Google could care less for existence of this regional newspaper, because it can show local ads on the apps. See more what we wrote here: https://medgadget.com/google
I don't think that's how authority works. In a workplace, I don't get to collect secret data on my bosses to see what they want and then say it's so I can better serve them.
If the voters are the bosses, then the politicians should live under surveillance by their voters, while we voters keep everything secret from our subordinate elected officials.
If we talking about politics, it seems entirely reasonable that a politician would want know what their constituents were thinking about, would tell their constituents what the constituents wanted to here and go to Washington and do what they promised. That's democracy - obviously, this democracy isn't in very good shape. But it's hard claim to that having a very fined-grained understanding of a constituency's wants is the thing that is destroying American democracy. I would lie it's more simply "lies and demagoguery". Now, it seems like Trump undoubtedly used data to fine-tune his demagoguery but I think we have to look elsewhere that data-access to explain the problem. Or - the problem with American democracy isn't groups have fragmented to many, many sub-constituencies but that significant portion of these have palpably irrational views (anti-vaxers, pizza-gate, etc).
That's problem for our democratic system. That degredation of education might be to blame. The destruction of the safety net might be to blame. Or the willingness of mainstream media to engage in propagandistic approaches equally as manipulative as the extreme right might be to blame - and that bring the point that complaints about Cambridge Analytica in a broader context seem entirely in this propagandistic stream, shifting the focus of attention and packaging a vague threat rather than giving any coherent analysis.