The part of me that reveres clear, concise, correct communication appreciates any effort to encourage factual correctness. However, the cynically jaded part of me concedes that this battle has already been lost - at least in the public sphere of communication (eg politics, advertising, journalism, social media, corporate comms).

Anyone paying attention already knows that anything of value you don't pay for directly will have indirect costs, most often in the form of strings attached, advertising, upsells and annoyances. Today, whenever I hear something offered for "Free" it immediately implies two things. First, any actual value on offer is relatively low (or net negative), and second, the entity offering it has made a choice to obfuscate the true cost for reasons I'd need to understand before engaging.

This means I probably don't want it and even if I might want something like the promise of it, I'd have to navigate and parse a maze of obfuscation crafted by someone who's already not being entirely upfront with me. Since A) I generally value my time (and related intangibles like vendor grief, inconsistency, etc) more than my money, and B) I've learned I'm usually not happy with the lower cost versions of things that matter to me - I've adopted a default stance of "I don't want anything that's free". It's possible I'm some kind of oddball outlier but I don't think so. In fact, I'm fairly confident a good chunk of the highly-desirable "reasonably affluent consumer" segment are similarly jaded and now associate any offer pushing "FREE" in the top-line with a negative connotation.