Amzeen What is Native Ad

In January 2020, Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook’s then–COO, shared a Teen Vogue article on her page: “Great Teen Vogue piece about five incredible women protecting elections on Facebook.”
The article titled “How Facebook Is Helping Ensure the Integrity of the 2020 Election” followed scrutinies after the 2016 US presidential election, where Facebook was criticized for allowing Russian propagandists to use its platform for spreading disinformation.
The interest in Facebook’s involvement in safeguarding the upcoming election was welcomed.

A Twitter user questioned the nature of the Teen Vogue article by tagging the magazine, leading to a reply from Teen Vogue stating, "literally idk," indicating the perplexity regarding the content.
The confusion arose whether the post was an original article or paid advertisement, with the magazine’s own social media account unable to clarify.

This chapter aims to define and analyze native advertising, providing various examples and discussing the pertinent issues it raises.
The Facebook/Teen Vogue case illustrates the intersection of news media and social media, emphasizing how native advertising blurs lines and appears deceptive.
A campaign by Philip Morris International underscores the lack of uniformity in disclosure language and practices in native advertising.

The chapter investigates how native advertising has become institutionalized in news organizations, tracing its historical origins to today's content studios.
It details spending metrics, job shifts, and the sheer volume of native ads to highlight the prevalence of this advertising form.
The differences between traditional display ads and native advertising are scrutinized.

The chapter concludes by connecting native advertising to the fake news phenomenon that emerged prominently in 2016 and introduces the concept of information pollution.

When viewed initially, the Teen Vogue “article” appeared as a standard news item but notably lacked an author byline.
Following public scrutiny, Teen Vogue added an italicized editor's note: “Editor’s note: This is sponsored editorial content.”
Social media criticism included viewpoints from former Teen Vogue chief content officer Phillip Picardi, reflecting discomfort over concealed advertising masquerading as journalism, especially given Facebook's poor prior handling of 2016 election-related misinformation.
Teen Vogue ultimately deleted the article due to mounting backlash, which was intensified by coverage from notable media like The New York Times.

The New York Times' reporting on Teen Vogue's Facebook content exemplifies issues as they tread similarly perilous ground, blending editorial and advertising content.
Articles funded by Mondelez International’s Véa brand were found on The Times website without clear sponsorship disclosures.
The Times operates its in-house content studio (T Brand Studio), similar to Teen Vogue and other outlets, producing sponsored content that mimics genuine editorial articles.

A significant oversight regarding The Times illustrates a concerning lack of accountability and transparency that breaches established journalism ethical guidelines.
Native advertising presents a slippery slope, as it integrates within most national news organizations' frameworks.

In Spring 2021, Philip Morris engaged major news outlets (e.g., The New York Times, The Washington Post) in a campaign portraying misinformation as detrimental to its tobacco harm reduction efforts.
Native advertisements closely resembled authentic news articles, displaying publisher branding and dates but diverged from native advertising norms by possessing author bylines, complicating reader discernment.
Despite mandated disclosures of the commercial nature of this content, inconsistency in disclosure language among different publications (e.g., "Content from…" vs. "advertisement") highlights a significant issue in native advertising practices.

The Federal Trade Commission mandates "clear and conspicuous disclosure" of paid content to differentiate it from editorial content; however, no universal language or specific location on the webpage is enforced for disclosures.
Variance in disclosure language can cause confusion for consumers, leading significant numbers to misunderstand or overlook these indicators.

Traditional advertising's goal is direct product selling, while native advertising often refrains from mentioning the sponsoring brand, focusing on storytelling to cultivate positive narratives around relevant subjects.
The Philip Morris native ads communicated misinformation as obstructive to their "tobacco-harm reduction efforts" without directly referencing Philip Morris products. This aligns native advertising with institutional or advocacy advertising aimed at influencing public opinion regarding specific issues.

Native advertising has roots in print-era advertorials designed to guide public perception and influence decision-makers, exemplified by nineteenth-century newspapers featuring disguised advertisements.
Modern native advertising evolved from these practices and gained traction in digital-first news platforms (e.g., BuzzFeed, The Huffington Post) before being adopted by legacy media organizations starting with The Washington Post's Brand Connect in 2013.
As of 2018, over sixty in-house content studios existed within major news organizations, with regionals also participating through partnerships with external agencies.

An inability to accurately track native advertising prevalence can be attributed to the variety of its formats and the fact that many organizations do not report specific revenue from native content.
Predictions about native advertising expenditures vary significantly; Forbes projects $4.3 billion globally by 2027, while eMarketer anticipates $97 billion in U.S. native advertising by 2023.
With journalism jobs rapidly declining, many professionals transition to roles in native advertisement creation, revealing a shift in media employment structures.

Traditional news organizations were primarily involved in advertising distribution, with separated roles for journalists and advertising personnel. The emergence of content studios has blurred those lines.
In-house content studios now perform functions akin to traditional advertising agencies, producing revenue from creating advertisements, which alters the historical separation of editorial and advertising practices, compromising journalistic integrity and independence.

The term "fake news" gained prominence following the 2016 elections, with some scholars characterizing native advertising as a form of fake news due to its misleading presentation.
Definitions of fake news include fabricated content and various misleading formats, lacking consensus among scholars, but it fundamentally threatens journalistic standards and public trust.
Native advertising is also implicated in "information pollution," where true and false messages are intertwined, creating confusion in information ecosystems.

The motivations behind native advertising often intertwine financial survival and the tainting of journalistic credibility, with potential social and political consequences.
Native ads crafted by news organizations may contradict journalistic reporting, further eroding trust and integrity in media institutions.