The opposite is true: ads must be paid for, which makes products and services more expensive.
Ads are a convoluted, inefficient form of wealth redistribution; whether that's "good" or "bad" depends on the specific circumstances.
For example, we might (simplistically) say it's "good" when we receive something paid for by ad revenue, but the burden of paying for (e.g. by price increases) and being subjected to those ads is carried by others. For example, if we tune in to a radio station, listen to a song, and tune out before some ad for a product we don't use.
We could say it's "bad" when the opposite happens, for example if we pay higher fees for shopping on Amazon, which then get spent on advertising Prime Video which we don't use.
The opposite is true: ads must be paid for, which makes products and services more expensive.
Ads are a convoluted, inefficient form of wealth redistribution; whether that's "good" or "bad" depends on the specific circumstances.
For example, we might (simplistically) say it's "good" when we receive something paid for by ad revenue, but the burden of paying for (e.g. by price increases) and being subjected to those ads is carried by others. For example, if we tune in to a radio station, listen to a song, and tune out before some ad for a product we don't use.
We could say it's "bad" when the opposite happens, for example if we pay higher fees for shopping on Amazon, which then get spent on advertising Prime Video which we don't use.