Requesting users play ads but giving them the content even if they don't means it's more like asking for a charitable donation than a transaction. They could paywall it but they don't, and it's not like there's a competitor with the same content.

Also, Google feel entitled to record your voice on your phone and send it to their servers. Do they think their users are a charity, or worse?

No they're fucking not! My browser on my computer is my property, not theirs! I have every right to control what it does!

Where the fuck do you get off, claiming that corporations have some sort of right to colonize my computer and subvert it against me? Why do you hate property rights?

Let me spell it out for you even more explicitly: you're arguing that a fake corporate "person's" fake "right" (i.e. privilege) to their fake "property" (i.e. temporary monopoly) is somehow superior to an actual person's actual right to their actual property. (In fact, it's even worse than that: what you're really arguing here is that fucking website terms of service -- which barely even qualify as a contract! -- are superior to property rights.) Do you comprehend, at all, how fundamentally ass-backwards your argument is‽