advertising brings, what are the costs, in the undermining of informal support networks, of ecosystem services and of personal mental and physical wellbeing? Is advertising -- in its present form, and at its present level of ubiquity -- contributing to economic growth, or to what former World Bank economist Herman Daly calls "uneconomic growth", where the marginal costs of an increase in GDP exceed the marginal benefits? The evidence strongly suggests the latter. What should we do? The most important thing we can do is to stop advertising creeping further into our lives. As I have been careful to say, it is not necessarily that advertising is evil, but that, in its current state of ubiquity, its impact on our values is. Advertising is neither evil nor useless; but it is out of control. We must create space for our intrinsic motivations to be expressed and validated. We need to nurture and celebrate what's great about culture: not strive to strengthen our already dominant role as consumers. And for that to happen, advertising has to give us some room to breathe. This requires quantitative action, removing advertising from certain parts of our lives. Qualitative shifts, such as encouraging advertisers to endorse intrinsic values instead of extrinsic, are not the solution. Although campaigns such as John Lewis' current Christmas effort are arguably more focused on the intrinsic than the extrinsic, they're still associating the fulfilment of those motivations with the act of consumption; and while the little boy brought a tear