@SuperDicq
> I disagree. Not everything related to advertising has to be rampant consumerism. There needs to be a way for companies to show the world that they exists and tell them which goods and serviced they are providing.
You're right about this. But there's a difference between old-timey commercials that just list stats ("The new Toyota whatever: with x horsepower and four wheel drive....") or ads you might find in a newspaper (which you can simply ignore and pull out), and advertisements which are manipulative and near unavoidable, and try to sell you a mythos to manipulate your monkey brain.

> Not every company exists just to "extract your resources" by definition, that's a very nihilistic take. Some goods and serviced provided by companies are actually useful believe it or not.
You're right, which is why I was careful to use "marketing" and "advertising", not "companies". Businesses have a right to share information about their products with the world at large, so that consumers and make purchases, and businesses can thrive, the point is that these interactions and engagements need to be voluntary and respectful, and the vast majority of those interactions facilitated by marketing firms are not. This isn't a nihilistic take, it's simply an observation of the modern advertisement and marketing meta.

>But the advertising that plays on your small town local radio station that pays the bills for them? Nothing wrong with that and everyone benefits.
I don't have a problem with this in theory, either. If I see an ad about a mom and pop shop down the street that makes belts and shoes, I'm not only going to go out of my way to patronize them, I'm going to be willing to pay more. I tend to grab flyers from the boards at local shops so I can find out about new events and shops in my area. Unfortunately, the vast majority of advertisement through something like Google's ad network is nothing quite so wholesome.