The Federal Trade Commission spent a full day yesterday, listening to 22 representatives from publishing, technology and academia to tackle that most thorny of questions: How to label native advertising.
There were arguments on all sides, with one academic even suggesting the need to study how the eye’s fovea perceives various labeling. Publishers hedged, they cautioned against the dreaded “one-size-fits-all” approach since native ads can apparently vary so widely. That’s why there is a BrandVoice on Forbes, Featured Partners on BuzzFeed, “From Around the Web” from Outbrain, “You May Like” from Tablooa, and so on.
Coincidentally, most also paid fealty to paid search listings, hailed as the original native ad format: a form of content, perfectly suited to the environment, and found genuinely useful to consumers who click away to the tune of billions for Google’s coffers. Perhaps then the industry should keep it simple and cast its gaze on how Google has settled on labeling this “native” format:
More in Media
How Semafor is redefining the head of video role
As Semafor’s head of video, Adam Banicki sits at the intersection of the newsroom and the commercial team, reporting to the editor-in-chief with a dotted line to the revenue side.
Comscore data shows how AI discovery is splintering beyond ChatGPT
Comscore data shows ChatGPT losing ground to Gemini and Claude as AI citations emerge as a key visibility metric for publishers and brands.
Paywall violation ‘eviscerates’ fair use defense: What OpenAI-NYT twist means for publishers
For publishers, the newly unsealed material doesn’t just bolster their legal case; it validates years of frustration over how their work has been treated.