The Manovitch article states that professional entertainment and other forms of commercial media “colonize” the identities of people by crafting templates, such as Facebook and MySpace, which enable the display of personal information. Hilderbrand, however, states that while web 2.0 introduced sites like Youtube, which democratizes media, it opens up the possibility for more copyright protection. Based on these two stances, I think Hilderbrand is more optimistic; his article spends a lot of time discussing the pros of YouTube’s accessibility and the wealth of content that it displays.
To address the second question: Facebook is a great example of how a tactic and a strategy can appear the same. For example, Facebook attempts to give its audience a place to display information about them to the world (if they so choose). However, not only does the strategy attract Internet users to the site, it allows them to customize the information they display. The user can choose what pictures to post, messages to leave on peoples wall. Thus, the online identification can be similar or differ from the physical person. It’s entirely up to the person using Facebook.