Hillary Clinton had a $1.2 billion campaign budget, along with the vast majority of active social media users, the whole of Silicon Valley, and most of the press on her side. If Democrats didn’t show up to vote for her, the root cause wasn’t less than $1 million worth of ads for fake news stories.
That’s the thing though, it wasn’t just these ads: a sizable contingent of Silicon Valley was bitter over the Bernie thing, stoked by emails from hacked Russians for example. Not saying the campaign didn’t screw it up, it’s still an achievement to fumble with all those advantages, but also this was one part of a much larger effort than a particular rash of $1 million dollar ad spends.
In any case, CA thinks they are influencing elections, and are selling as much to clients. It’s like arguing over whether or not someone is helping a drug kingpin because they don’t actually sell a lot of drugs.
The current investigation into the Russian meddling of the U.S. presidential election is still underway. It's still too soon to assume that the interference was "less than $1 million worth of ads".
For example, the Russians have been funnelling money to Trump's family for a decade. Trump sold a FL mansion for 240% of it's value ($100M) to a Russian oligarch:
