There are a few overlapping issues here:
1) I fully understand that no one wants to pay for services they didn't use and it can be tedious to follow up on these things to have them cancelled. I always give people the benefit of the doubt when they say they didn't land here.
2) I'm sure we all want fees (if any) to be as low as possible. It follows then that the most efficient way to charge fees and collect them makes the most sense for everyone. As someone else has mentioned if a method other than radio transmissions needs to be found, it will likely cost more to administer and therefore fees will increase.
3) 1 & 2 notwithstanding, If you agree that you should pay the aerodrome a fee for the use of their facility - Then the aerodrome making use of the radio transmissions to simplify the collection of that fee is mutually beneficial. In which case it is not for commercial gain at all, it is an aid to help simplify an accepted transaction between two parties.
If you don't think you should pay an aerodrome to use their facility, you are quite welcome to avoid paying them by simply not going there.
I can't really speak to the issue of the "Corporatised Money Making Venture" type aerodromes as I have no experience in that. Our aerodrome has always been privately owned and we are kept honest by the very simple fact that if we charge too much we won't have any customers.
Additionally, we don't have an instrument approach so I can't comment on that either.
I hope somewhere in the middle ground pilots who accept the need to pay usage based fees towards the upkeep of an aerodrome should have an expectation that the fees will be fairly and accurately calculated. Both parties should help to make this transaction as fast and painless as possible.