Advertising has become a pervasive force shaping contemporary consumption, frequently blurring the distinction between necessity and desire. In my opinion, I largely agree that companies use persuasive advertising to influence people to buy things beyond genuine needs, although this influence is not absolute. Indeed, through emotional appeals and data-driven marketing, companies often reframe optional goods as apparent essentials.

First, the strongest reason for this view is the systematic advertising that exploits the aspirations and insecurities of consumers. For instance, advertisements associate goods with status, happiness, or belonging, so that people treat non-purchase as personal loss. Specifically, premium smartphones are marketed as symbols of identity rather than functional things, prompting consumers to buy frequent upgrades despite adequate devices, thereby intensifying unnecessary consumption.

Some people contend that consumers remain rational and that advertising mainly provides information to support choice. Admittedly, this claim has merit, but modern marketing increasingly tailors promotions using digital profiling, which reduces critical distance. Moreover, when customised advertising follows people across platforms, impulse buying becomes more probable, especially for fashion and convenience goods. As a result, advertising moves beyond informing demand to actively influencing what consumers need.

In conclusion, although advertising does not remove individual responsibility, its techniques substantially influence people to buy things they do not truly need. Furthermore, emotional framing, symbolic value, and targeted promotion collectively push consumers beyond necessity. Therefore, I agree to a large extent that modern advertising by companies exerts excessive influence over consumer buying behaviour in society.