> Advertising tells me what goods and services are available, and at what prices.

No, it doesn't actually, it does the opposite. It's attempting to make you less aware of what's available outside of the monopolies, because the monopolies shove the barrel and there's no room left.

If you take a walk through town versus watch TV for a day you will get a completely different view of what products and services are out there. This mentality is exactly why small business continue to struggle - we're made to believe they don't exist because of advertising.

The reason this works is because the human brain is pretty stupid and it can't keep everything in it all at once. You also don't get a choice in what you remember, your brain does that without your consent. So you see McDonald's 1000 times and your local butcher shop signage 5 times and you'll remember one, but not the other.

So did phone books and catalogues. Ensuring why dispersal of information about services and prices does not require advertising.

Wouldn't phone books and catalogues count as advertising?

I don't think anyone is against receiving marketing information they request, like a catalog. It is far different than advertising that people are essentially forced to view even if they don't want to see it. You request a catalog, just like you might request to view an online store's website. But advertising you don't request is a completely different ballgame. Imagine if every time you turned on or sat down at your computer it forced an open specific newspaper's site, or reddit, or twitter, and there was no way to stop it from happening. If every time you drove down a specific road all your electronic devices opened up some random website you didn't request or want. That is what people have a problem with.

Phone books (at least in the US) were sent out for free. You didn’t subscribe to them or request them. They were advertising.

So I can choose to opt into this service?

So does a search engine and 3rd party reviewers.

Further, any store will be pretty highly incentivized to provide a quick list of goods or services offered and likely the prices (most already do this).

I don't need the same ad repeated 20 times to know that Ford sells cars and trucks.

> I don't need the same ad repeated 20 times to know that Ford sells cars and trucks.

Not only that, but the Ford ad of a vehicle driving cinematically across a landscape before disgorging a laughing and implausibly photogenic family does nothing to inform you about the relative merits of the vehicle. Anything specific mentioned in the advert is as likely to be flimflam or only technical truth as not, so nothing mentioned in the advert can be taken as useful purchase-informing fact without further research.

Exactly. There's an economic negative to advertising, particularly in the US, because "puffery" is legal. That gives advertisers nearly complete free reign to lie about stuff (especially if they put in a small white text disclaimer that says the things you are seeing and hearing aren't really true.)

Not really, or at least i don't see how. Advertising can at most tell me which companies are spending a significant portion of their budget in ads instead of in making a good product or service.

To put it another way: where i live, ads for cheese or meat are non existent (while ads for fast food or cigarettes are very common), and yet i know that those products are available on supermarkets or other food stores. And i can find cheeses and meats of many brands, qualities and prices on those stores.

I don't see how having ads for those things would be an improvement. In fact, i suspect that ads would be used to convince people to buy products of less quality, or downright toxic, as seen on the rampant fast food and cigarette ads.