Poll: What Do You Think About Sponsored Content (Native Ads)?

    by Mark Glaser
    April 5, 2013
    The Atlantic got into trouble with sponsored content from the Church of Scientology, so now there's a longer explanation of how sponsored content works

    Have you ever stumbled upon a really entertaining ad? It was funny, entertaining, maybe even enlightening, and you even passed it around to friends to check out. That’s the hope behind the movement of “native advertising,” a spruced up version of “sponsored content” that appears not in ad slots but right in the editorial well. But sometimes these native ads go terribly wrong, as they did with The Atlantic running a sponsored story by the Church of Scientology and comments being censored. Native ads are getting attention at sites such as BuzzFeed and even the Washington Post, but what do you think about them? Do you accept them as a way to help fund journalism? Do they go too far into the editorial well? Vote in our poll below, or tell us your deeper thoughts in the comments. You can hear an in-depth discussion on native ads on this week’s podcast or check out our entire series on Online Advertising, Evolved.

    Tagged: buzzfeed ethics native advertising sponsored content the atlantic

    Comments are closed.

  • Who We Are

    MediaShift is the premier destination for insight and analysis at the intersection of media and technology. The MediaShift network includes MediaShift, EducationShift, MetricShift and Idea Lab, as well as workshops and weekend hackathons, email newsletters, a weekly podcast and a series of DigitalEd online trainings.

    About MediaShift »
    Contact us »
    Sponsor MediaShift »
    MediaShift Newsletters »

    Follow us on Social Media