If you acquire content under terms set forth or agreed to by the content creator then you are fine; even if you spend no actual currency. If the content creator sold the content to a third-party with a "no resale/no redistribution" condition and you buy/acquire it from the third-party then the third-party has stolen those goods and you are acquiring stolen property.
You call pirate propaganda "greedy" but your propaganda is just a defense of your own greed - wanting to acquire goods on your own terms instead of negotiating with the seller/producer.
And, you ALWAYS pay for content; maybe not in directly via currency but in some way you pay - or else someone else pays for you. And by your own logic you SHOULD pay for mp3 music and 700MB DVD since those FORMATS apparently have value to you compared to the subsidized radio and TV broadcasts. Ad-Supported is no different and, as mentioned a number of times, if advertisers stop subsidizing freeloader consumption then either the freeloaders will need to directly pay for it or accept that it will likely go away.
Your narrow definition of "consuming" is odd. The mere act of reading or listening to content IS the consumption of said content; and the content producer has every right to demand conditions on how you may consume their content. And while the certain formats and technology makes disregarding those conditions easy and mostly risk-free you are fooling yourself if you claim such disregard is anything more than stealing since "consent" by the owner is conditional and you failed to accept those conditions.
I leave it to the reader to decide whether stealing is for or against their ethical beliefs.