Podcast Summary: "Big Sister Is Watching You"
The Dream | Hosted by Little Everywhere | Air Date: February 13, 2026
Episode Overview
In this episode, host Jane Marie kicks off the newly relaunched format of The Dream by diving headlong into the surveillance capitalism debate, focusing on how ad tech data is increasingly intersecting with government surveillance interests. Jane’s guest, Jess Lewis—a cyberpsychologist, ad tech veteran, and Chief Technology & Data Officer at Cross Media—helps unravel the technical, ethical, and societal complexities behind advertising data, government requests, and the erosion of privacy.
Key Discussion Points & Insights
1. The Blurred Line Between Ad Tech and Government Surveillance
-
Recent Developments:
Jane Marie references a Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Request for Information (RFI) seeking industry input on how commercial big data and ad tech providers could support investigation activities ([00:46], [11:22]). -
Jess Lewis’s Reaction:
Jess explains that while ad tech's goals are fundamentally different from DHS/ICE's objectives, convergence is being forced by government interest in the vast behavioral data ad tech creates ([07:41], [12:36]). -
Ad Tech Data Types:
- Probabilistic data: Makes educated guesses about individuals based on behaviors and demographics; useful for ads but highly unreliable for precise surveillance ([09:23]).
- Deterministic data: Data that explicitly identifies individuals; much more sensitive and already largely held by government ([10:08]).
Quote:
"Advertising is fundamentally not suited for surveillance. It's not suited for the Department of Homeland Security... because of the way that ad tech data is collected and what we use it for, it fundamentally doesn't match with what they're looking for."
— Jess Lewis [07:41]
2. Risks of Misusing Ad Tech Data for Law Enforcement
-
Data Misinterpretation:
Connection points like public WiFi or shared locations (apartment buildings) mean people could be misidentified, leading to wrongful targeting or raids ([10:08]). -
"Ad Tech Compliance"—A Meaningless Term:
Jess critiques the vagueness of “ad tech compliant” as cited in the RFI, noting it enables an “accountability vacuum,” allowing both vendors and law enforcement to evade blame when errors or harm occur ([13:15]-[13:50]).Quote:
"There's no industry standard for something, quote, ad tech compliant... creates an accountability vacuum."
— Jess Lewis [13:15]
3. The Double-Edged Sword of Data
-
Benefits & Dangers:
While ad tech and AI technologies have enabled useful functions (e.g., medical accessibility, personalized streaming, location services for lost devices), their scope makes them powerful for both societal good and invasive surveillance ([13:50]-[16:44]). -
Policy and Ethics:
Jess has worked to institute privacy-forward policies like GDPR but acknowledges it is impossible to guarantee altruistic outcomes for such powerful systems ([20:14], [22:46]).Quote:
"It doesn't matter how altruistic I think we intended it to be. I now know not to be as Pollyanna about it."
— Jess Lewis [22:46]
4. How Ad Tech Creates Personal “Personas” and “Householding”
-
How Targeting Works:
Jess explains the ad tech concepts of “persona-building” and “householding” (grouping users by household for shared targeting), and how these techniques are only probabilistically accurate ([26:18]-[27:06]). -
Stitching Data:
Email addresses, device IDs, travel histories, etc., are “stitched” together into a unique identifier (UID), making digital profiles more robust and persistent ([27:07]). -
The Loss of Serendipity:
Jane and Jess lament how hyper-targeting and algorithms have homogenized online experiences, reducing genuine discovery and surprise ([36:31]-[40:07]).Quote:
"Now [streaming platforms] only show me things that they know I'm going to like versus things that's going to challenge me... and that has everything to do with advertising, keeping you on the system longer."
— Jess Lewis [40:07]
5. Personal Reflections and the Evolution of Optimism
-
From Tech Optimism to Caution:
Jess grew up a “big nerd” and lifelong early adopter, believing tech was a force for good (Atari, Star Trek, Judy Jetson’s closet) ([32:35]-[33:42]). Experience has made her much more wary of unintended consequences. -
Recognition of Naïveté:
Both Jane and Jess reflect that they didn’t foresee government becoming the bad actor with these tech tools ([29:53]-[31:13]). -
Jess’s Guilt & Determination:
She feels guilt for her role in creating these systems but wants to maximize education and “shine the biggest light on it” so people can make informed choices ([22:46]).
6. The ICE RFI—What’s Next?
-
What Companies Should Do:
Jess advocates for ad tech and data companies to ignore these requests and resist selling data for surveillance ([44:05]). She warns about “dangerous actors” who might comply. -
Organizational Response:
Some in the industry are exploring forming a consortium to voluntarily refuse compliance with such government requests ([45:55]). -
Pessimism About Corporate/Consumer Resistance:
Jane questions whether consumers will ever “vote with their wallets” at sufficient scale ([47:11]). Jess points to boycotts like Target and Amazon but admits outcomes can be muted ([47:46]).Quote:
“Anyone who participates [with ICE’s RFI] needs to be thought of as a dangerous actor or one that does not have the society at large, the community at large, people's privacy first in mind.”
— Jess Lewis [45:08]
7. “Is It Too Late?”
- Inevitable Capitulation?:
Both hosts speculate on what happens if giants like Meta and Palantir comply—Jess admits, “They will. It’s not even a what if. They will 100%.” ([48:40]) - Resignation vs. Resistance:
The possibility of withdrawal from all technology is floated half-jokingly [49:03].
Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments
- On government overreach:
"They want to know where you are at all times and what you're doing and what you're looking at."
— Jess Lewis [12:36] - On vendor responsibility:
"Remove the fear and stand on the right side of history."
— Jess Lewis [45:55] - On regret:
"Am I embarrassed that I was perhaps too trustful...that our government would actually protect us? Sure."
— Jess Lewis [30:04] - On the dream of tech:
"I wanted Judy Jetson's closet. Yes, absolutely."
— Jess Lewis [33:42] - On algorithmic curation:
"Now I'm not surprised when I'm on the apps...I have curated a world that I like on Threads, but it's so homogenized, even if I'm actively trying to make it not exactly like me."
— Jane Marie [37:11] - On resisting government overstep:
"Companies, ad tech companies, ad brokers, data brokers need to say no. They just need to not respond."
— Jess Lewis [44:05]
Key Timestamps
- 00:46: Jane introduces the topic and her own outrage at data mining and government interest in ad tech data.
- 01:56: Jess Lewis explains her role as a cyberpsychologist and tech/data officer.
- 07:41: Jess explains why ad tech data doesn’t fit government surveillance needs.
- 09:23: Breakdown of probabilistic vs. deterministic data.
- 13:15: “Ad tech compliance” is exposed as a misleading concept.
- 22:46: Jess discusses her feelings of guilt and the evolution of her thinking about the technology's impact.
- 26:18: Introduction of concept “householding” in targeted advertising.
- 36:31: Discussion of the loss of community, connection, and randomness in the digital world.
- 40:07: How algorithms have narrowed our digital experiences.
- 44:05: Jess discusses how industry can resist ICE’s RFI by refusing to respond.
- 48:40: Jess and Jane confront the likelihood that major platforms will comply with government requests and what that means for the rest of us.
Tone & Style
The episode is frank, a bit cynical, and shot through with moments of dark humor and nostalgia. Both Jane and Jess balance technical explanation with personal reflection, trading skepticism and a faint glimmer of hope for collective resistance, or at least greater awareness.
Final Thoughts
This episode sets the stage for The Dream’s new season: unsparingly honest, deeply informed, and determined to expose the forces and frameworks making the “American Dream” even harder to grasp in an age of near-constant surveillance and relentless data commodification. Listeners are left with sobering questions about agency, privacy, corporate responsibility, and the ethics of participation in a system that may already have gone too far.