Commentary

Still Flummoxed By Native Advertising

Though the FTC has new guidelines, nobody really expects there will be less native advertising in 2016, and the same must be true overseas, too. So this is not the time to stop wondering who is pitching, nor is it time to stop looking around to find out. Sometimes in small type in an obscure corner of your screen, you may find the “proud” sponsor. It's so obvious!

In London, the Advertising Standards Authority has just come down against BuzzFeed, which had been running “14 Laundry Fails We’ve All Experienced” with what the watchdog group concluded was scant notification that the item was sponsored by Dyon Colour Catcher, a fabric dye.
As far as I can tell, BuzzFeed has now removed the item, so it’s hard for me to say the standards authority was absolutely correct. But I suppose so because I am suspicious of native advertising and native advertisers and I am that way because they are trying to fool me. It’s plain to see.
Well, maybe not so clear.  The FTC wants ads in this country to be clearer when a brand is guiding the material. Disclosure should be in “plain language that is as straightforward as possible.”  ” A word like “advertisement” would be huge, candid step forward.

According to Financial Times, the BuzzFeed native ad post said “Dylon Brand Publisher” at the top of the Web page and, at the bottom of the advertorial, text stated “It’s at times like these we are thankful that Dylon Colour Catcher is there to save us from ourselves. You lose, little red sock!”

That, to BuzzFeed seems clear because everybody who reads BuzzFeed also calls an advertiser a “brand publisher.” Sure they do. And that jovial end note is obviously a sign you’ve just seen a native ad, because it’s true every time a publication makes a kind reference to a brand, that’s an ad.
Well, no. Not a paid one. In the expanding universe of Internet journalism, kind references abound. Not all of them are paid, which makes the paid ones seem even more confusing.

Looking around, I found that Huffington Post weighed in on native advertising’s vagaries with a piece called “8 Myths About Native Advertising That Are Almost Entirely Untrue.” The piece is almost entirely true, to its credit. But here’s the kicker. At the end is this note: “This post is sponsored by HuffPost Partner Studio, whose brand we wholeheartedly support.” It is obfuscating for the ad department. 

Well, they’re honest. About being deceitful.

pj@mediapost.com

1 comment about "Still Flummoxed By Native Advertising".
Check to receive email when comments are posted.
  1. Steve Baldwin from Didit, January 13, 2016 at 3:19 p.m.

    It's time for ads to stop skulking around and proudly proclaim themselves to be paid items. Enough dissembling -- it makes everybody in the ad business look like a shamefaced grifter.

Next story loading loading..