how art is when marketed and communicated?

Art marketing, perhaps the idea of it, gets on my tits – though it could also be that said tits are a tad too sensitive..

Just bumped into this art marketing info..

Am just struck, I suppose, by the non questioning tone of communication and marketing in art.. With the idea that art does language, a fuzzy network/constellation of sequences and ways to imagine – rather than a communication system, I just wonder how marketing and its own need to be communicated comes into plat, into the rhythms of art processes to support rather than interfere..?

non communication and art

Am doing searches for un/no/non-communications – when practices, activities, events or other stuff, does Not communicate, either by intent/nature or failure. eg when i type, i am doing a communicative practice that might fail to mean something, or be misunderstood/construed – however it is a communicative activity. When I go to the toilette, or fix a brew, sleep, look out of the window, etc. – it might Mean something for another person, specially in various communicative contexts, or it might be understood by another in various ways. However, these activities are by intent and their nature, not communicative. They in and of themselves are not an attempt to deliver a message other than whatever another person may read into them. (eg, i may understand you are thirsty when you drink, but i could have also read into this that perhaps you enjoy liquids at 6.37am every day – without misreading or not understanding you, because the reading, the attempt to make your drinking communicate to me, is my own act..)

Now, lets imagine that you drink on stage. That in a sense you share or invite people to share the view of you having a brew. Drinking as a practice then, through the stage/media becomes shareable. Through the processes of letting-others-know i am drinking, there is an assumption that some communication – by intent – takes place. a – else why inform others. b. if am attempting to let-others-know am implying that there is a communicative interest/intent.
However, the shareable mean – eg media – is seen instinctively as a tool rather than a part of a communicative act. This, ofcourse, is an instinctive mistake – eg McLuhan et al – however, if one is interested in UN-intentional, potential constitutive – non-communication processes – perhaps these are the activities/places i should look at?

Searching non-communication brings non-verbal but communicative activities, like tone, gestures, etc..
Maybe am imagining some stuff wrongly here..