Both texts I just read inform people about thea new advertising method.

However, they are in contrast: while the first one claims that this new type is more creative and entertaining, the second declares that we need to eradicate the actual waymethod/process of publishing and sponsoring.

Since the internet had awas hugely diffusion in 2000, now theed in the year 2000, advertisements had a transformation, and arenow, it is mostly online.

TheyAds are often amusing, awarenessingtargeted and personalized based on your recent researches.

I'm not sure if 'targeted' is exactly what you mean, but it's a good word to put in, in the context of what you're talking about.

This can be seen as a good way of sponsoradvertising, allowing agencies/businesses to increase their popularity and people to find instantly find what they need.

Anyway, at the time they were harmless: people would just ignore them and gowalk straightforward. past them

VThis is very different from nowadays, when people are constantly targeted as new customers.

This can lead to senseless consumerisms: by using animated videos and colorful images, people are trapped and buy things they do not need, expanding the problem of pollution.

Senseless would be a nice word to add in!

This difficulty can be solved by encouraging people to enquirelearn about our unclean planethabits.

However, there remains an unresolved complication: customers will continue to be enchanted by ads showing manipulated products, becoming hypnotized and maybe obsessed by fake artefacts.

However, there are some measures that can be taken, like writing on the spospeaking up/making a complaint if some part of the product is missing in the video or if some qualities are magnified.

In conclusion, considering each side, digital advertising is more evolutved than the old onekind, but an original realistic/fair description of everya product should be preserved in every spotad.

However, they are in contrast: while the first one claims that this new type is more creative and entertaining, the second declares that we need to eradicate the actualcurrent way of publishing and sponsoring.

They are often amusing, awarenessttention-grabbing and personalized based on your recent researches.

Anyway, at the time they were harmless: people would just ignore them and go straightforwardmove on.

This can lead to consumerisms: by using animated videos and colorful images, people are trapped and buy things they do not need, expanding the problem of pollution.

Maybe "over-consumerism" would be even better.

However, there are some measures that can be taken, like writing oin the spotcomments if some part of the product is missing in the video or if some qualities are magnified.

"on the spot" means immediately, but the sentence is weird because you could be writing in a notebook, which wouldn't be as useful. I would say "in the comments" because it makes it clear that you want to share the negative feedback with other people.

In conclusion, considering each side, digital advertising is more evolutved than the old one, but an original description of every product should be preserved in every spot.