How about recent political ads:

Vote for X! Y is going to destroy America! <insert imagery of America being destroyed under Y>

A political ad is substantially more than awareness (which I'm not denying as being a part, I'm saying it is a small part). But this ad, like most, are there to convince you. It is still an ad.

This isn't to say that there aren't awareness based ads. There's also shitty ads run by first year film students. But these aren't what people are being bombarded with on prime time TV, in Times Square, or on popular websites. This isn't a mathematical proof where a single counter example discredits an entire thesis, because we aren't working in absolutes here. Acting like it does is arguing in bad faith. For what it is worth, the examples I gave for Coke and car commercials are taught in first year marketing courses as well as psychology courses.

The second case is not persuasion and it is a moral harm.

On what basis is it a moral harm?

I don't think your specific example illustrates moral harm. But there are definitely advertisers that do. We could for example say how BP spends a few million on ads to buy public good will and talking about how they are cleaning up the environment while they increase their pollution levels by expansion is morally reprehensible. Such advertising is quite common.

A transaction is good if both parties benefit, but in this transaction I end up with a product worth less to me than I paid.

Any extra persuasion on top of listing features and asking price is an attempt to shift the potential customers away from rational cost/benefit analysis, leading them towards making a suboptimal choice. In simpler words: it's making their lives worse.