People say this all the time, but I would like to see the data. And I mean specifically regarding the claim, "no one is immune to consumerist advertising," not "consumerist advertising is effective."
I am sure ads can work on me, and the HN crowd, if I was targeted. But there are much easier targets that generate more income. So companies spend more on gambling etc ads, where they can make more money.
I don't know, if I didn't know Mullvad or GrapheneOS, and saw ad on TV, I'd probably check it out.
Or an ad about an ISP with IPv6 support, at the very least it would make me check if my current ISP finally added support, and consider options otherwise.
Or one about some new colocation service that happens to open near my location, you bet I'd check out their website and maybe even pay them a visit.
Maybe 20 years ago? I don't watch TV and have used an adblocker for the past 15 years. There is almost no way advertisers can even reach me. I also don't buy things very often.
Oh, ads work alright on people like me. People like me who despise ads. People like me who go out of their way to avoid ads. People like me who, when confronted with ads which somehow manage to make it to our ears for a few seconds before we manage to skip them or rip off the headphones - the only ads which I'm still confronted with are "dynamic ad insertion" specimens in netcasts, often at DOUBLE THE VOLUME - will remember the brand or company and actively avoid giving them our business.
Yes, ads work, maybe not in the way the advertiser thinks but they work alright.