The Blurred Lines Between Native Advertising and Editorial Content
Native advertising, particularly in-feed video, is gaining traction as a way for media companies to monetize digital content. However, the initial success of this ad format belies tensions between publishers and social media companies, and concerns about blurred lines between editorial and paid content.
Primary Way in Which Native Ads Are Labeled on US Consumer Websites, 2015 (among ads tracked by MediaRadar)
In December 2015, after studying the issue for more than a year, the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued a lengthy set of recommendations for all relevant parties to clearly disclose the presence of native ads. The document included guiding principles, examples of when businesses should disclose that content is native advertising and instructions on how to clearly label native ads as such.
Since those guidelines were issued, an April 2016 report by from MediaRadar found relative uniformity in the terminology around native ads in the US. The most commonly used term among ads tracked by the company was "sponsor" or "sponsored," with 54% representation. Next were "promoted" and the lack of labeling, tied at 12%, and other word choices made up the remainder.
In an earlier study, conducted in July 2015 by from Research Now for tech company from Contently, nearly half of US internet users polled at some point felt deceived upon realizing that an article or video was sponsored content.
In December, the FTC released an updated version of guidelines for native advertising, asking publishers to include a variation of “Ad,” “Advertisement,” “Paid Advertisement,” or “Sponsored Advertising Content” in the beginning of an article or video. Most framed the guidelines as an attempt to reign in native advertising on digital publications. Read “Another Buzzword: "Influencer Marketing." Does It Pass FTC's "Authenticity" Smell Test?”; http://sco.lt/87t2LB