You certainly have a point. I agree that our attention might be the product, from the viewpoint of advertizers who pay for this system. And don't hate the player, hate the game.

Yes, but there could be more than enough blame to go around. Hacks aren't to blame for creating the system, but they are responsible for how they participate and for their character and choice of values. If a hack needs to make money to pay for his or her family, that's what this person most values. The hack isn't an artist since his or her craft isn't an end in itself but a means to generate enough money to pay for something important (raising a child, paying rent, etc). The hack is a businessperson.

That's fine, but if the public better understood the distinction between hacks and artists, would hacks still have most of the attention? There's a fine line between businessperson and demagogue. If the hack benefits from obfuscating the difference between hacks and artists, the hack can be blamed for that deception too. And hacks can be blamed for any negative effect of their work, such as in helping to infantilize the masses, lowering the bar, sowing mass confusion, perpetuating neoliberal myths that are bad for the planet, and so forth.