Probably true - the whole Cambridge campaign seemed to be built on outright lies.
> with newspapers and TV
That was always highly visible - so errors or breach of process was instantly caught. Nor could it break down beyond Sun readers or Fox viewers - which covers an awful lot of ground ranging from centre ground moderates to extremists on the fringes. You end up catching a fraction.
Now you can pick off just those thought susceptible, or false promises to those wanting and those not wanting $thing. Which starts to make a mockery of countries with funding or campaign restrictions.
It was always a fine game trying to promise all things to all voters, but remained within the bounds of legality and common sense. Now we seem firmly outside and we need a thorough refresh of oversight. Or I suppose we could believe Cambridge was a one-off.
It wouldn't have happened either, way, all of Turkey would have gone to Germany.
> political advertising can be tuned to your personal hot button issues
But it was always already the case with newspapers and TV news, you wouldn't target the same population with Fox news vs CNN or the Sun vs the Guardian. And people wouldn't have seen ads for the "other side" since they wouldn't have opened the other newspaper or switched to the other channel