Imagine asking people if they would like to see TV without advertisements. Answer would be yes. Ask people if they would pay $50 per month to see TV without advertisements. Answer would be no for many/most people.
This is Polling 101.
Big chunks of the web operate on the implicit tradeoff that you give information about yourself to drive advertisements in return for free content/functionality.
Pew was one of the weakest political polls last cycle. This article demonstrates that they are really no longer a good source of information on any topic.
The survey should have asked people if they would be willing to accept a slightly hire risk of death due to terrorism in exchange for a more private and anonymous Internet. I think in America the answer would be a resounding NO.
I think the answer should be YES, but most people in this country will gladly trade liberty for security, at least as long as Obama is in power. You would not believe how many people have told me: ah, as long as democrats are in charge, who needs the 4th amendment. On the other hand I do live in South California, so should I expect any different.
> accept a slightly hire risk of death due to terrorism in exchange for a more private and anonymous Internet
All the spying has not lowered the risk of death due to terrorism a bit. There is good evidence the actions taken to curb terrorism actually made the world a lot more unstable, increasing the global terror risk. And that is if we don't count invading countries looking for WMDs that didn't exist or drone strikes as terrorism.
> "Are you willing to accept the deaths for four people in 2014 due to terrorism and the sexual abuse of 18 toddlers in exchange for online anonymity."
While a good start, this should also include some ‘reference mark’ to gauge how many 22 deaths in the whole of the US are – e.g. via deaths in car accidents, plane crashes or gunfights.
This analogy is weak. When I watch TV, I am anonymous. So why is non-anonymity required for Internet ads? I think it isn't, really. (Besides: NSA stuff is definitely not just about ads.)
>Ask people if they would pay $50 per month to see TV without advertisements. Answer would be no for many/most people.
With the cost of cable subscriptions, people already pay over $50 per month for TV with advertisements, in fact the average in 2011 was $86/mo [1] If given a choice to pay $50 to see their same cable TV content without advertisements, I think they would jump at the bit.
> Big chunks of the web operate on the implicit tradeoff that you give information about yourself to drive advertisements in return for free content/functionality.
Stress on the word "implicit tradeoff". The first step is to make the "implicit tradeoff" very explicit in a manner that the consumer understands the repercussions of using the web service. Second, is when the users start worrying about the anonymity aspect particularly when your "presence" has been used for actions other than the explicit (or implicit) specified intent.
Also, it's not like advertisement doesn't work within an anonymous environment. There's still a lot of information to use: the main topics of the community, for example. TV, radio and newspaper advertisement worked fine for decades. Web services can be created with significant less resources than TV stations and newspapers, but we are meant to believe that they are only viable if users relinquish their anonymity? Give me a break.
Businesses will try to make as much money as possible within what users tolerate. I mostly stopped going to the cinema because I don't feel it's acceptable that I pay a ticket and then have to sit through at least 1/2 hour of advertisement. But many people still tolerate that so they keep doing it.
You raise a point that I am not sure you meant to: Do people prefer participating in anonymous communities? Wanting to be anonymous and wanted to be with other anonymous people are pretty different things.
> 86% of internet users have taken steps online to remove or mask their digital footprints—ranging from clearing cookies to encrypting their email
> 55% of internet users have taken steps to avoid observation by specific people, organizations, or the government
...then this really sounds more like "most internet users would like to be anonymous when looking at porn online." You don't clear your cookies, or encrypt your email, to be anonymous; you do these to prevent people who already know who you are from finding out what you were doing.
Imagine asking people if they would like to see TV without advertisements. Answer would be yes. Ask people if they would pay $50 per month to see TV without advertisements. Answer would be no for many/most people.
This is Polling 101.
Big chunks of the web operate on the implicit tradeoff that you give information about yourself to drive advertisements in return for free content/functionality.
Pew was one of the weakest political polls last cycle. This article demonstrates that they are really no longer a good source of information on any topic.