( CNN ) -- Like most couples , my wife and I were discussing marriage before we officially got engaged . But we discovered that we could not keep our private information private . Once we started discussing engagement rings in ( supposedly ) private Facebook messages to each other , my Web browser became inundated with engagement ring advertisements . From then on , anyone in the same room with me knew our plans . The aphorism is true : If you 're not paying for the product or service , you are the product or service being sold . Like most people who use computers , the information in your private message or Web search is being sold to an advertiser . The ads continue to follow you around , popping up at the most inopportune moments when a friend , relative or co-worker happens to be near your screen . We get Facebook for free , and we do our Web searches for free , but the price we pay is our personal data , which are used by advertisers to entice us to buy things that they think we want . It does n't have to be this way . I would gladly pay a reasonable fee to Facebook and Google if they would allow me to keep my private information private . I 'm hardly alone in my disenchantment with the tech world 's use of people 's personal information . Embarrassing and out-of-context Web advertisements are affecting nearly everyone who uses the Internet these days . My friend Jim Trammell , a college professor in High Point , North Carolina , who is happily married to a woman , once wrote a paper about how homosexual Christians are covered in evangelical magazines , which required online research . `` I felt like I was getting ads about gay-friendly vacations and dating services for months , '' he told me . `` Fortunately , Mrs. Trammell knew about my project . '' Alyssa Richter , a magazine editor in Lexington , Kentucky , was recently looking for baby shower gifts for a pregnant friend . Right on cue , her Web browser became flooded with neverending ads for parenting magazines and onesies . `` My husband saw them on my computer and was like , 'Is there something you 're not telling me ? ' `` she said . Although these examples are innocuous and even humorous , other targeted advertisements based on ( ostensibly ) private information can seem intrusive or disturbing . A friend of mine who asked that I not use her name told me about an experience she had when she discovered that she was pregnant . Not surprisingly , she immediately began conducting Web searches related to her pregnancy . Excited and happy , she and her husband started making plans for the baby . If that were the end of the story , the targeted ads would have been fine . But she miscarried . And the targeted ads kept coming . `` It was hard for me even though it was such a short-lived pregnancy , '' she said . `` It was like rubbing salt in the wound . '' The programs that scan your Web activities do not discriminate . Being non-human , they can not show sensitivity or propriety . Any clue you 've given is fair game . Distressed about a dying relative ? Do n't be surprised to see ads from funeral homes . Planning to buy your spouse a surprise gift ? It wo n't be a surprise when an ad for that specific gift pops up suspiciously on your browser the next day , when the two of you are sharing the computer . I should add that it 's not just Google and Facebook that engage in these practices . Many websites choose to run ads that are specifically targeted toward users . I 'm always fascinated by the way people rush to defend the reigning tech companies . One example : No one is forcing you to use these websites . True , but that 's sort of the same thing as telling a person in a small city with no public transportation that they 're not legally required to get a car . If you want to participate in normal daily life , what other option do you have ? Another example is the `` terms of service '' defense . If you use Facebook or Google , you have agreed to their terms of service . That may be true from a strictly legal standpoint , but from a practical standpoint , this defense falls apart . As Alexis Madrigal pointed out in an article in The Atlantic , reading all the privacy policies you encounter in a typical year would take many days . Finally , there 's the `` opt out '' defense , which goes something like this : `` Hey , the tech companies are n't trying to get you to do anything you do n't want to do . You can adjust your privacy settings . '' Right . Really ? Tech companies have their own interests to look over . That 's why , despite a class-action settlement meant to ensure Facebook users ' agreement to their `` likes '' being used in ads , the practice continues under the radar . The public has been whipped into a frenzy lately by revelations of NSA overreach . It 's interesting to me that people are n't equally concerned about privacy violations by tech companies . `` Do n't be evil , '' Google used to say . OK. That 's admirable . But that 's also a pretty low standard . How about adding an additional goal : Do more good . `` Facebook is free , and always will be . '' Great . Continue to offer the free version for people who do n't care about their privacy . I 'll take the `` Premium '' version , pay for it with actual money and keep my personal information to myself . The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of David R. Wheeler .
Chris Wheeler : When I go online , data from my private data are sold to advertiser . Wheeler : We get ads for free , but the price we pay is our privacy . He says embarrassing and out - of - context Web ads are affecting nearly everyone . Wheeler : I would rather pay Facebook a fee in order to keep my personal data private .