In this task, you are given news articles and you need to generate a highlight, i.e., a short summary, with a maximum length of 10 lines.

Example Input: (CNN) -- Facebook will soon be using your Web browsing to help decide which advertisements you see. A new Facebook system will use your activity on other websites to send you what Facebook thinks are ads about your current interests. Advertisers will, in effect, be bidding to get their ads in front of you. Here's an example: Say a Facebook user visits a travel website and clicks on a page about a vacation package to Las Vegas. If an advertiser has bid on that kind of search, that user could then see ads for discounted trips to Vegas the next time they visit Facebook. "By bidding on a specific impression rather than a larger group, advertisers are able to show people more relevant ads while also running more efficient and effective campaigns," a Facebook spokeswoman said in a written statement. The site announced the new system, called Facebook Exchange, to marketers last week. It's expected to begin rolling out in the next couple of weeks. Real-time bidding is already widely used across the Internet. In a blog post, Mike Stiles of Atlanta-based social marketing company Vitrue compared the feature to Google's Ad Words, which pushes an advertiser's ad in front of users when they search for a keyword that advertiser has chosen. "The underlying principle is that users want relevant ads, advertisers don't want to waste money on misguided ads, and Google wants both users and advertisers to be real happy so they'll come back again and again," he wrote. Currently, Facebook ads are targeted based on users' profiles and the companies or other pages they "like." Stiles writes that model will still be available for advertisers, but the new one should be more specific. Facebook noted that users will be able to opt out of Exchange by going to the site's About Ads page, by clicking on an "X" that appears on the ads themselves or by blocking cookies on their Web browser. The company statement said Facebook won't share any user data with the advertisers and that no advertising controls that users currently have will go away. How do you feel about Facebook targeting ads? Jim Anderson, Vitrue's chief operating officer, said the new system probably won't appear dramatically different to the typical Facebook user. "It's not going to be discernible to most consumers," he said. "Most people won't notice any difference or, to the degree they can discern a difference, it will be 'Wow ... this is more relevant to me.'' " And while the "real time" nature of the new system will enhance relevance, it won't be perfect, according to Anderson. "It's possible you might not be served an ad until after you took that trip to Vegas," he said, referring to the previous example. "But without this kind of targeting, you might be served an ad for a trip to Miami, which you weren't considering anyway." As Web giants like Facebook and Google get better at harvesting user activity, using Web searches for advertising is becoming increasingly popular. According to research firm International Data Corporation, more than $5 billion in online advertising is expected to go to real-time bidding ads in the United States in 2015. That's 27% of what's predicted to be spent, up from less than 10% last year. Facebook, of course, is increasingly under pressure to demonstrate a sustainable advertising model since its stock went public last month. Anderson predicts the site will continue to diversify how its ads work in the coming months. It's sometimes a tricky prospect. It was just revealed that Facebook settled a lawsuit last month by the state of California over its "Sponsored Stories" feature. According to reports, Facebook paid $10 million to charity after five users claimed the site broke California law when it used their posts in the feature without paying them.
Example Output: Facebook Exchange will use Web browsing to target ads .
Browser cookies will let advertisers hyper-focus their offers .
Facebook says users may opt out of the ad model .
"Real-time bidding" is already used by Google, others .

Example Input: (CNN) -- Three people died Tuesday in an explosion in the Turkish capital Ankara, in what may have been a terror attack, Interior Minister Idris Naim Sahin told CNN sister network CNN Turk. "There was a powerful explosion in a car that was parked," the minister said, citing preliminary information. "The possibility that it was a terrorist attack is high." He said it was also possible that a gas explosion had caused the blast, "though that is a weak possibility." The explosion shook a crowded street in the center of Ankara, damaging vehicles and buildings on Kumrular Street near the Kizilay metro station, the official Anatolia news agency reported. An eyewitness described the scene as "terrible" and "very chaotic." "Cars were exploding. Pieces were spreading around. We were terrified," the unnamed witness told CNN Turk. Deputy Prime Minister Besir Atalay said earlier there were no deaths, but 15 people were wounded, Anatolia reported. Ankara governor Alaaddin Yuksel said officials, including police and a prosecutor, were investigating the cause of the blast. He said many cars were parked on the street with garbage bags under them at the time of the explosion. Five people are in surgery, he added. An emergency services doctor at Numune Hospital in Ankara said 10 injured people were brought to the hospital. One was in intensive care, one was in the burn unit and the other eight have light injuries, said the doctor. None of the injuries are life-threatening, said the doctor, who did not give a name. Doctors in state hospitals are not allowed to speak to the media. The explosion took place in front of the Cankaya municipal building, local official Bulent Tanik said on Turkish television. He cited eyewitnesses as saying a burning gas tank had been thrown out a window onto the street. Police have sealed off the street, Anatolia reported. --CNN's Yesim Comert and Talia Kayali contributed to this report.
Example Output: NEW: A car explodes in central Ankara, the interior minister says .
NEW: The possibility that it was a terror attack is high, he says .
Wounded people are taken to nearby hospitals .

Example Input: (CNN) -- In 2009, du Pont heir Robert H. Richards IV, 47, was convicted of raping his 3-year-old daughter and served no jail time because, a judge said, he would "not fare well" in prison. You are only just hearing about this travesty thanks to a civil suit filed recently by Richards' ex-wife, Tracy Richards, alleging that he also sexually abused his 19-month-old son during the same period. How does this happen? Lady Justice wears a blindfold that's supposed to represent objectivity. Unfortunately, it seems to blind her in some cases, especially when a defendant is wealthy and connected. And Richards is wealthy and connected -- he's the heir to not one, but two fortunes provided to him by his predecessors. In 2008, Richards was indicted on two counts of second-degree child rape for sexually penetrating his daughter repeatedly from 2005 to 2007. Those two counts would have carried mandatory minimum sentences of 10 years each. He was released on $60,000 bail. Richards is unemployed, but with a trust fund and apparently had plenty of cash to hire one of the state's top law firms. His lawyers pushed until Delaware prosecutors offered a deal allowing him the fourth-degree rape plea -- normally reserved for statutory rape cases -- and Richards admitted the assault. At the sentencing, Superior Court Judge Jan Jurden ordered Richards to attend a sex offender rehabilitation program and pay a whopping $4,395 to the Delaware Violent Crimes Compensation Board. (That'll teach him!) She then sentenced him to eight years in prison, but suspended the prison time and put him on probation instead, writing: "Defendant will not fare well in Level 5 setting." Translation for the rest of the world: The rich rapist will "fare well" living as a free man in a house where he raped his own daughter. A few points here: . 1. The purpose of prison is twofold -- to keep criminals segregated from their victims and the rest of society, to punish them by denying them the freedoms that law-abiding citizens enjoy and to rehabilitate them. Prisons are loaded with pedophile rapists who are incarcerated regardless of their ability to deal with the prison environment. If Richards was a relative of the Dipshots, instead of the du Ponts he'd probably be behind bars now. 2. And if the rapist doesn't "fare well" in prison, how is he a good fit for society? As far as I'm concerned, a sex offender who rapes his own child will never "fare well" in society. You can't cure sex offenders of their sexual urges, you can only teach them to try to control them. In the meantime, we have a duty to keep rapists like Richards contained in a location where they have no contact or opportunity to hurt another child for a good long time -- and that place is in jail. 3. The Delaware justice system appears to have also lost sight of Richards' victim -- his own kid! Think she'll "fare well" knowing her rapist was sent home to his mansion and never properly punished? The sentence was outrageous, but blaming the judge is too easy. The truth is the entire system is to blame. People with zero resources to properly defend themselves are funneled into the prison system, while rich rapists like Richards can buy an excellent criminal defense team and secure a deal no public defender could ever dream of getting. But Tracy Richards has not given up. She filed a suit last month seeking compensatory and punitive damages on behalf of her children. In addition to detailing the abuse of his daughter, the lawsuit also alleges that while Roberts was on probation, he admitted to the sexual abuse of his toddler son. It cites probation reports from two different probation officers notifying the Courts in 2010 and 2012 about that suspected abuse. According to the lawsuit, which is supported by paperwork from the earlier criminal case, Richards went into his daughter's room while she slept and penetrated her with his fingers while he masturbated. The suit also alleges that Richards then told the girl "to keep what he had done to her a secret." The girl eventually told her grandmother, who informed Tracy Richards. The girl then recounted the abuse to her pediatrician and New Castle County police, who arrested him. Given all this background, it may seem like a slam dunk of a civil suit, but societal factors -- the advantages of money-- can play a large role in the justice system. You can be certain that if Richards lives off a trust, it's one that du Pont family attorneys have painstakingly set up, and it's probably going to be remarkably hard to pierce. Likely knowing she's in for a fight, Tracy Richards has hired law firm Jacobs & Crumplar, attorneys more than capable of going after people who think they are untouchable. This is the firm that won victims $77.4 million in a settlement with the Catholic Diocese of Wilmington over sex abuse by a priest. I've got my fingers crossed that a civil jury will award jaw-dropping damages in this case and strip Richards of the trust fund and the wealthy status that allowed him to avoid jail -- where he really belongs.
Example Output:
Mel Robbins: Du Pont heir Robert Richards did no jail time in rape of his toddler daughter .
Sentencing judge said, in part, he "would not fare well" in prison. This is not justice .
Robbins: Wealth shouldn't shield him from justice .
Robbins: Civil jury should award big damages strip him of wealth that helped him avoid jail .