Advertising is 1st-party information, and so is more biased than 3rd part information.
This is a good reason why an individual might ignore advertisements. But there's a problem with projecting into the future from it: aside from the fact that advertisers are still going to be interested in selling themselves, as long as they have even an infinitesmal margin for doing so, the unbiased third-party information generators have to be able to stay in business.
That is to say --- sure, third-party information is better; that's why UL and Consumer Reports exists. But the third-party companies have to make money some way, and there appear to only be two viable models for that: (a) get paid by the producers of the products being reviewed; and (b) get paid by the consumers of the information. (A) has obvious conflict-of-interest problems.
(B) is problematic for other reasons --- how much would you pay for an independant rating service? How could you trust it to be unbiased? Maybe that's not a problem if it is biases align with yours, but ... and either way, the producer of the product is still going to have an incentive to market their product.
The advertising model is too skewed towards companies with the most money, thus slowing the rate of innovation because old companies have momentum.
This sounds like a reason why advertising should go away rather than a reason why it will. What's the process by which being skewed towards those with the most money and slowing innovation causes advertising to self-destruct? Wouldn't the innovative new companies need to advertise to get noticed?
The primary benefits of advertisements to capitalism are:
I detect an analytic problem here --- but it's one that's common in popular discussions of economics. The driving force behind advertising is not that it benefits capitalism, it's that it benefits the companies that are advertising. Capitalism be d****d; companies do what is in their self-interest, by and large, and the government regulates their behavior and the market in the interest of capitalism or society as a whole. Unless you have government advertising regulations, there is no way to make advertising meet anything other than the interests of the sellers of advertising space or the purchasers thereof.
And if advertisements cease to have any practical use, perhaps they can be socially or forcibly restricted.
This depends on the country you live in. In the US, this would be difficult --- commercial speech is still speech, and so restricting it runs into constitutional issues.
[ Parent ]