There's very little planned obsolescence anywhere. It's more about racing to the bottom and building the chepest possible product that will hold for a while.
Planned obsolescence is a tricky term and has many faces (see e.g. a classification at [0]). A good and widespread example of overt, in-your-face planned obsolescence (surprisingly not mentioned in the article I linked) is "fast fashion", where nobody even tries to hide that clothing is designed to deteriorate quickly, to accommodate a season-long replacement cycle.
I think race to the bottom deserves to be its own type of "planned obsolescence" (again, not mentioned in the Wikipedia classification). While in a highly competitive market, the design process may boil down to "do the same as competitor X, but slightly cheaper" instead of explicitly setting the durability target low, the end result is the same - products that have no business existing enter the market, live very briefly, and forever enter the waste stream. It's a systemic problem, and it's planned in the sense that if you enter such a market, you've already decided to create short-lived trash.
Has anyone actually compared this over long stretches of time and compared apples to apples, not apples to oranges?
Additionally, most people don't want personalized ads based on tracking: https://www.emarketer.com/content/do-people-actually-want-pe...