Thank you for the follow up link, it brings up good points. I think the 1st Amendment angle is too quickly brushed off by the author and not sure how this would be settled in a legal dispute--especially considering the means and depth of advertising and tech companies. The article is worth reading and great food for thought. Isn't this a part of legally excluding under-18s from using social media?

If giving out anti-draft pamphlets is considered by the courts to be equivalent to shouting fire in a crowded theatre then why couldn't advertising?

Seriously. I did not consent to these companies to be manipulated into giving them money. It's an invasion of the public sphere, and worse it is highly authoritarian which should always be resisted on principle.