The industry has been making it very clear and overt for years now that what they consider "making things better" is directly opposite of what normal people consider "making things better".
The marketing industry only makes money by making things worse for us all. They are concerned, though, with finding out exactly how much worse things have to be before it starts interfering with their income streams.
Their industry is marketing. That's their profession. If they want to make it better, they should quit. They do not quit, ergo, they do not want to make it better.
Given a offer of same pay and the ability to use the same skills, I think people would choose to to make things better instead of worse. That means they would like to make it better.
You are making a different absolutists claim, that any desire to make things better doesn't count if someone wont sacrifice everything for it.
This is by its nature a comparison, and not a statement about one things.
Keep in mind that this all in question of if people in marketing might have knowledge or insight about changes in advertising.
Im not sure that I directly attribute that to advertising itself, as much as upstream SEO choices.
I dont mind at all if a recipe includes commission links or ads. I hate that the optimal SEO format is to waste as much of the readers time as possible.
That said, I also see your point in how SE results have an incentive to bury valid non-commercial results.