Who is living under a rock and not getting bombarded with political BS every second on FB but seeing FB ads from PBS?

I'm just not sure that's a good forum for governments to try to get out a message.

If social media platforms can identify certain demographics, like those who smoke cigarettes, then why wouldn't the government use that to target 'Would you like help to quit smoking?' program availability ads to them?

* https://www.ontario.ca/page/support-quit-smoking

* https://www.canada.ca/en/health-canada/services/smoking-toba...

The government can put ads on the packages of cigarettes them self for free. Without the moral defeat of benefiting from spyware.

Why would you want to waste tax money on Zuckerberg's mansions.

Etc.

Because it selectively reaches only Facebook users. So the government can begin tailoring messages to certain demographics, for maximum "effect".

Because our government doesn't understand technology and generally gets fleeced anytime they encounter it.

Remember the Phenix pay system? It was an IBM project that was supposed to save us 70 million a year, instead they paid IBM an additional 2+ BILLION to try and fix the broken crap they'd delivered. Never even worked, they're currently taking bids to replace it already.

80% of public servants had pay issues, many were foreclosed on because they couldn't pay their mortgages, someone even killed themselves.

And we expect the Canadian government to accurately determine ROI on digital ad spend? That's hard enough for skilled people in the space (some who have found it to have no effect altogether). Our government is simply going to be fleeced for every penny they have (and then some).

Remember, these are the same people who shut down the CRA website every night. Can't even access your tax info after hours.

> Remember the Phenix pay system? It was an IBM project that was supposed to save us 70 million a year, instead they paid IBM an additional 2+ BILLION to try and fix the broken crap they'd delivered. Never even worked, they're currently taking bids to replace it already.

Do you really believe that this was a result of bad in-the-moment decision-making at all levels, instead of a result of being trapped by previously-negotiated long-term vendor exclusivity agreements?

(In my experience, governments are generally good at cutting their losses — they're far more rational re: the sunk-cost fallacy than individual people are. So it would be surprising to me if this were true.)

Actually, they're as bad as everyone else at that, e.g, Obamacare website; state of Maine website; lots more.

Sounds to me like you should fix those problems rather than just giving up altogether.

The idea that there is something fundamental about governments that maeks them incapable of doing these things correctly is nonsense.

The people don’t believe in paying for competence in government employees. Then they are shocked and outraged when bottom 10% compensation leads to bottom 10% performance. If you want to hire someone to do product management for a nine figure government project maybe you should pay more than $90k to the product manager if you want it to be managed properly. The government gets exactly what it pays for in these roles.

Social media companies are really in business of personal data collection. Based on younger generation being so switched on about news I think 'news' are really being force fed into your social feed (rather than you fetching the news). Governments spending tax payer money with these companies are really approving this sort of unethical behavior.