That's because we discovered psychological manipulation for advertising in the 30's thanks to Freud's nephew, Bernays. And it was brought to light when psychology hit center stage in the 70's after the psychedelics lash-back. So our current advertising methodology is a very recent phenomenon.

This suggests (disingenuously) that they were offended in the same way.

> Advertising offendees will always be offended no matter where advertising sophistication is at.

People won't be less affected if advertising is less harmful or pervasive...?

You aggregation function is broken. The impact of advertising is a not a boolean value.

I won't be offended if advertisers can figure out which ads I won't respond to and then refrain from smacking me in the face with them. Or if they can avoid annoying me with moronic gimmicks like dancing lizards selling insurance.

I'm ready. Go ahead advertisers. Delight me with silence.