One of the formats that is gaining more and more weight in internet advertising is what is known as native advertising. The contents are served directly integrated into the environment in which they are displayed and are a part (in a way) more of the medium in which they appear. Are they like the infomercials of the past? Not exactly: native advertising is interesting content that adds something to the reader and is therefore much better viewed by them than traditional ads.

In addition, taking into account that ‘usual’ advertising is experiencing its worst moments (after all, we are in the era of adblockers and also at the time when banner blindness is more accentuated), this type of New formats help to meet the needs of brands and media French Email Lists, generating a relationship of value for the consumer. The consumer receives content that interests him and to which he is more receptive and the media achieve a change for the fall in billing of traditional advertising. For brands, it is a new way of positioning their brand messages and reaching consumers with them. But is all that glitters really gold in native advertising? Is the model really sustainable and is the format really so well received by consumers, media and brands? Although some online media have already bet or are doing so in the future for things are a bit more complicated. The great examples of how you can survive without traditional advertising have shown that things are not so easy. Buzzfeed The great example so far of how native advertising can solve all problems, it just missed its goals, which many have already seen as the end point to the idea that it is possible to live without banners. The analysts pointed out then that the problems were not only in the medium itself and in its strategy, but there was also a contextual element. Brands were no longer so much for the task of leaving everything in the hands of a third party and formats with more traction were appearing, such as video.

It is not that native advertising has stopped working, but that you have to think better about what is being done and how it is being done. Native advertising began to be more questioned. Had he ceased to be El Dorado? The truth is that, as in everything, you had to put certain buts and you had to remember from the beginning that not everything goes with the excuse of native advertising. It is not that native advertising has stopped working or that it should already be condemned for a misstep, but that you have to think better about what is being done and how it is being done. Because the truth is that native advertising is running the risk of becoming ‘the new banner’, that is, a format that has ended up saturating the consumer with so much used and especially so badly used. This type of content works very well, has very good returns and connects very well with the consumer, but for this they have to be used efficiently and, above all, following certain ideas of good practices. Some media that are putting an excess of content or that accept practically anything as native advertising are, in reality, mortgaging the future of the format.

Does native advertising hurt the media?

And from there you could get to the idea that native advertising damages online media and makes them lose their good image in the eyes of readers. A study by several researchers linked to the Arthur W. Page Center for Integrity in Public Communication, from Penn State University, has analyzed how consumers react to native advertising (understanding not only sponsored content but also formats such as sponsored posts on social networks) and how this affects the perception that users have of these media and from those social networks. Their conclusions are that, although the brand that stars in these messages is not harmed in terms of brand image, this does happen with those who support it. As soon as consumers perceive that it is native advertising, their opinion of the medium in question or the medium in which it has been published begins to be lower. The study began because of one of the bad practices that is possibly weighing more on these types of formats and those who publish them. The experts saw content that looked like news but was not, but was advertising content. This is called the “chameleon effect”, since the main objective is to camouflage content or advertising elements in the same way as the rest of the information.

Native advertising is causing the general perception of the media to be worse due to bad practices, Taking into account that according to some studies only between 7 and 18% of recipients are able to identify native content in the face of news, the question of how we react to this content is more and more important. Therefore, they subjected a group of readers to a perception test. One part of the group was told whether or not they were reading native advertising. The other was left to their own devices to identify what they read. The final results showed that native advertising made the general perception of the media worse. That is, it will get worse. The explanation lies in what consumers expect from the media and how they perceive native advertising. “We have the idea that the news media should be objective and neutral and that this is how it works,” one of the members of the research team explained to  “When people see that the media and companies work together to deceive us, it changes the perception of the medium dramatically,” he added. Why doesn’t the vision of the brand also change? Consumers accept that you are doing your job to promote their products and therefore are not so critical of them. This change in perception not only affects these specific content, but also has a direct effect on the environment in general. Users stop believing in what they post and begin to reluctantly look at their content.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *