The television analogy sure is terrible. I'm okay with television showing ads because:
a) ads support the channel itself, your cable bill just gets you the channel(s) -(like the web)
b) I have DVR, so I can just skip ads on most everything I watch... worst comes to worst I just change the channel.
I don't really even watch tv outside of HBO and Adult Swim, and HBO, a premium channel I pay extra for, only shows me ads relevant to their own service and its programming.
The important thing to take away from the discussion is that people don't even consider the "ads" on PSN, Wii or Steam as such- they feel appropriate to the service. I like signing on and having my console/service tell me about new games or new services/apps, because it helps my own gaming experience. At its absolute worst it at least feels feels relevant to the service.
The problem I have with "TV-like advertisements" is that the average person pays 60 dollars a year, and for what? To get more ads then they'd get on rival platforms? When I sign on to one console and see ads for Jeep, Old Spice and Mountain Dew, while its "rival" is telling me about new games I might want to know about, which one is doing me the greater service? Ironically its the free services that seems to treat my dollar with the most respect.
So what are you paying for? Xbox Live is just P2P gaming, and its not like the ads dont make enough money to cover server maintenance. Really, that money is just being recycled back into a marketing machine that wants to squeeze even more money out of you. They want you to keep paying to do things you already paid for (Netflix, HBO, etc) just on the console instead. It feels cheap, maybe even a little gross, and the only people that win are the people who want new Call of Duty content in a reasonable timeframe. "TV-like advertisements" are an even further abstraction from why I play videogames, and evidence of where I'm sure some people would like to see videogames headed.