• by Tyler Loechner , Staff Writer @mp_tyler, June 11, 2013

Is it just me, or has "native" been popping up more often recently?In the last two weeks, "native ad formats…have emerged as important new ad models." Google now offers support for native ads via DoubleClick, but they have also warned brands to be honest about the ads. Tumblr has extended native ad units to desktop feeds, and an Online Media Daily commentary argued that banner ads can be native. The list goes on and on.

On the one hand, I think that native advertising is real-timey (even if the impression wasn't bought on an exchange) because if the ad blends with the surrounding content well, the user "consumes" the ad in a different, natural, and real-time way. So to me, native advertising done well counts as real-time from the consumer point of view.

On the other hand, to all the players (read: you), maybe native shouldn't be considered real-time unless it's traded on an exchange. What makes it different than a traditionally served ad? Sure, the publisher and advertiser had to work to get the ad to look like an "advertorial," but there's nothing real-time about that. 

While native advertising is intended to blur the line between content and advertising, it has certainly blurred the lines of where it belongs. Then again, perhaps it's fruitless to try categorizing native advertising; maybe it really is its own thing. What do you think?