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
After an oversaturation of AI-generated content, creators’ authenticity and ‘messiness’ are in high demand
Content creators and brand marketing specialists on how 2026 will be the year creator authenticity becomes even more crucial in the face of rampant AI-generated “slop” flooding social media platforms.
‘The net is tightening’ on AI scraping: Annotated Q&A with Financial Times’ head of global public policy and platform strategy
Matt Rogerson, FT’s director of global public policy and platform strategy, believes 2026 will bring a kind of reset as big tech companies alter their stance on AI licensing to avoid future legal risk.
Future starts to sharpen its AI search visibility playbook
Future is boosting AI search citations and mentions with a tool called Future Optic, and offering the product to branded content clients.
