Native Advertising Is Toxic
Posted on Friday, August 30, 2019 at 6:56 PM
Native advertising is a compelling revenue stream, but there are
major drawbacks for publishers who use it.
By William
Dunkerley
Interest in native advertising is booming.
So
is interest in recreational opioids.
You may think there's no
parallel here. But there is. In both cases you see what may appear to be
a short-term reward. But you'll end up with an undesirable price to pay
in the long run.
It's pretty clear from the mainstream press what
that price is for the recreational opioid users. It affects not only the
individual users, but the public health and safety as well.
What's
the Downside of Native Advertising?
We don't yet have enough
experience with native advertising to actually have felt the long-term
detriment. Therefore we must rely upon analysis to give us a look into a
likely future. But I fear a lot of publishers may not be concerned
enough to look those prospects in the eye.
Thus my argument
against native advertising will likely be an unpopular one. After all,
many advertisers are clamoring for it. That makes them an easier sell
for the sales staffs. Publishers who are experiencing declining sales
with display advertising often see native advertising as a bright new
hope. Nevertheless, the practice of running native ads can be
problematic.
Here's the Downside
It comes down to
integrity. That's the quality that gives magazine publishers an
advantage over the plethora of competing information that permeates the
internet. A distinguishing quality of most magazines is that their
content is devoted to readers' interests. That promotes reader trust and
reader loyalty. Without integrity it may be hard for consumers to
perceive the distinct value of our content in the face of competing
sources.
In the pre-internet era, magazines enjoyed a near
monopoly on curated periodic information. We were the go-to place for
information, news, or entertainment in a given area of interest. If you
wanted a weekly news summary, there was a selection of magazines that
could supply it. If you were interested in plumbing, there were
magazines for you. If you wanted to keep up with the latest fashion
trends, there were magazines that provided that service.
Now,
however, a few things have changed. And they all work against the
magazine publisher.
New Challenges
First is the
availability of the desired content from a multitude of sources. More
than ever before. Many of them are free and easily accessed. Good-bye,
near monopoly, here.
Second is that search puts all that at the
reader's fingertips in an instant. There's no waiting for the next issue
to appear. Instant gratification is there for the asking. Good-bye, near
monopoly, here too.
Third is the matter of curation. When we plan
an editorial calendar and when we plan the next issue, we're performing
a service for our readers. We're aggregating an audience that shares to
some extent a common interest. And we're producing content specifically
to satisfy readers' interests. That's quite a benefit. We may still have
some uniqueness here.
As an analogy, think about museums. They
curate too. You can go to a science museum, an art museum, a history
museum, and so on. Think how inconvenient it would be if all exhibits
were randomly distributed around one huge, enormous building. That would
be quite off-putting for many people.
We're different from
physical museums in an important way. Digitally we don't take up
physical space. And even in terms of print publications, we're more
compact than a public library.
Does that mean we still have a
near-monopoly advantage in so far as curation? Unfortunately it does not.
Search
gives users the opportunity to self-curate, even if it is quite
imperfect. The main limitation is that given today's state-of-the-art
algorithims, search results are pretty cluttered. That's because what
may seem relevant to a search engine algorithm may be way off target for
humans. Some results may lead to sites intended to deceive you, perhaps
maliciously. And now we also have to contend with
political/ideological/business biases introduced by the IT giants.
Those
limitations would seem to still give us an advantage in curation. But
the story does not stop there. New online technologies promise to give
users more and more options to customize their online experiences.
Ultimately that will lead to consumers being provided effortlessly with
content more precisely targeted to their own interests, lifestyles,
location, and financial status. This means we'll be losing our advantage
as curators.
What's Left to Make Us Stand Out?
It's
our integrity and dedication to the needs and interests of our readers.
But how does that relate to native advertising?
The plain truth
is that native advertising is intended to blur a line. It's the
demarcation between content developed by editors for their readers and
the messages of advertisers. Ad content's primary objective is to serve
the advertisers' needs. That goal differs from good editorial content
that focuses on reader needs.
A lot of people go to great lengths
to describe euphemistically this blurring and make excuses for it. But
the fact remains that an objective of native advertising is to make ads
look more like editorial content.
It's hard to believe that the
blurring won't lead to readers concluding that our content, as a whole,
isn't there to serve them exclusively.
That's what's toxic about
native advertising. It has the potential to diminish reader trust in our
integrity and editorial judgment.
Going Forward
Just
why advertisers are clamoring for native advertising is another story
for another time. For now, though, it's important to understand that it
portends untoward consequences for publishers that are accepting it.
Recently
Association Media and Publishing presented the results of a mini survey
on this topic. The survey asked, "How does your organization feel about
native or sponsored content?" Here are the results:
Publisher
attitudes toward native advertising.
This shows that these
publishers recognize the downside of native advertising. That's a good
start.
The next step is to come up with strategies for dealing
with advertisers that are hungry for sponsored content opportunities.
We'll delve into that in a future issue.
William Dunkerley is
principal of William Dunkerley Publishing Consultants, www.publishinghelp.com.
Add
your comment.