The only advantage of 1080p24 is the frame rate matches movie film. Some modern video cameras today now can shoot in 24P as well but these would be the exception rather than the rule on much of the HD programming available. Movies converted from film to video, a different story.
If you want a good 1080p24 channel I would suggest HBO be the one to be #1 in the full time arena. IT is mostly movie film sourced channel and has a history of being first in HD distribution.
Personally, I don't have an issue with 24 FPS vs. 29.97 as the artifacting I get is minimal on 29.97 fps with my conversion equipment. BUT, I do recognize that some Plasmas and LCD HDTV monitors really really suck at frame rate conversion. So, movies are just best displayed in native frame rate to avoid the issues. For me, I find 29.97 acceptable viewing and am concerned more about bit rates on compression and horizontal resolution passed.
IMO, 24 fps is over rated as a format. BUT, it is correct that an argument can be made for that ever so slight strobing effect you get with 24 fps vs. 29.97 and the director's desire for a subtle surreal look people refer to as the "film look"
So much for that, but is the ad false and misleading? As a professional who produces commercials, what ads aren't? The argument deserves a simple 3 letter answer... DUH!