There are a lot of ideas in this thread, so I’ll start with your first question.
If you want to demystify the concept, I really recommend reading its Wikipedia article. This section of Privacy Guides’s Common Threats article is also a great place to start.
To provide an extremely loose argument for why it might not be a good thing:
- Privacy is a human right.
- Surveillance capitalism is mass surveillance for the purpose of profit-making.
- If (2) constitutes a violation of the right to privacy, then surveillance capitalism infringes on human rights.
- (2) does constitute a violation of the right to privacy.
- Therefore, surveillance capitalism sucks.
This is a very in-a-nutshell explanation (I can go into detail if you like—I actually wrote a dissertation on the ethics of mass surveillance 
) and makes some basic assumptions like “infringing on human rights is bad”. I hope it illustrates a somewhat basic angle, though.
There is a lot more to the topic (although not necessarily complex—just expansive), but I hope that this is enough to address your question.
To understand a little bit more about the actual aim of surveillance capitalism, I really recommend watching The Social Dilemma. Likewise, with the Cambridge Analytica scandal, questions like “why is data even valuable in the first place?” are the best place to start.
With regards to Google specifically, this is simply false. I recommend this extremely thorough breakdown of exactly why. Otherwise, they have an extremely well documented history of malpractice. Ironically, I suggest Googling it.