It's sort of an indictment on the type of personality that can't see the difference between voluntarily collected data focused on desires and aspirations and clandestinely collected data focused on creating a psychological profile of your fears to manipulate. But they used the same API on Facebook, so if you're fucking stupid despite spending endless hours on the internet over 20 years, basically the same thing happened.
However, that all obfuscates the primary point as summed up by Nancy LeTorneau -- it's not about the microtargeting or even the fact that one campaign leveraged aspirations of a wide coalition while the other honed in on the fears of a bunch of scared, fearful cowards -- that's besides the point of the bolded:
In a free and open society, it is impossible to imagine making either one of these approaches illegal. While the breach of Facebook data and possible collusion between the Trump campaign and outside groups may prove to be a legal problem for Cambridge Analytica, the kind of propaganda they employed to tap into fear in order to influence people emotionally will be up to voters to reject.
None of that changes the fact people are going to be rightfully annoyed when you choose to bring them to you by using the fear of a stick rather than a carrot. That's why Shapiro (and anyone echoing him) can go fuck himself if he's expecting people to feel the same way about the two campaigns just because they were both #DataDriven.