I understand what you're saying, but no, I don't agree. These companies have positioned themselves so that it is often unavoidable to do business with them.

If you have a visual arts business you are more-or-less required to have an Instagram account, and maybe even advertise on it. It's where your customers and business partners are and if you want to participate in that space, you're handicapping yourself so severely by not being there that you're probably putting your business's existence at risk. It's a similar story for online businesses with Google ads and SEO, and so on. There's shades of grey in how much one decides to do business with these companies, sure, but it's pretty much unavoidable, because of how these companies worked to create & maintain their monopolies.

That's not similar to choosing to work at those companies. There are zillions of jobs out there aside from working at one of the six most evil companies in the country. No one is choosing Google or Meta as their only option. Anyone working at Meta or Google is doing so by choice.

I think we might just disagree, and that's okay

the effectiveness of online ad targeting enables a lot more businesses to be profitable, this is indisputable

it is still a choice to say "I need to run a visual art business that makes $X" as much as it is to say "I need to be a software engineer that makes $Y"

giving Meta money is the easiest option, of course

if you feel you can't achieve your goals without giving Meta money, that's fine, but maybe don't judge those who feel they can't achieve their goals without working for Meta

It's interesting you call these sites and advertising opportunities absolutely necessary for things like visual arts businesses and yet don't think they are doing any good in the world. If the ad spots and targeting didn't exist then niche internet-ads-dependent businesses also would not.