It's way more like, what if I'm pouring red colorant to the rivers, and I know the colorants make absolutely no damage to the river but activists still try to destroy my business because they strongly believe so.
So yeah, I find your counter-argument depressing as well; because its not about who is right or wrong but the one who believes themselves in control to determine being both the judge and the executioner.
Well, I'm not going to argue the merits of civil disobedience here. I'll just point out that while "innocent" ad networks might be affected, it's factually indisputable that the vast majority heavily spy on their users and occasionally serve them malware, and that there has been zero legal consequences for that. It's easier to convince people to not be "both the judge and the executioner" if the actual judges and executioners do their work.
Civil disobedience is never about products you don't like, its a tool when society doesn't work not when you don't like the inside of a store (analogy of store == website); you don't start throwing rocks at stores because when you entered you found some announcements you didn't like; that's not civil disobedience, that's just assault at private propriety and sociopath behavior.
