Then he should just say "I am unwilling to work for a company that sells ads", rather than trying to say that none of Google's work is meaningful simply because they sell ads.

I don't believe substituting "serving ads" with "making money" distorts the message at all. I think it merely highlights how immature his stance is. He stated quite plainly that Twitter isn't about connecting people, that Facebook isn't about sharing links, because they are about "serving ads". The implication here is that a company which sells ads cannot do anything, which is ridiculous. He set up a strawman.