| | |
|
ShayBanerjeeFirstEssay 32 - 14 Jan 2016 - Main.ShayBanerjee
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="WebPreferences" |
|---|
| | | But what is the source of this increase in “consumer engagement”? Advertisers argue that native ads allow them to provide relevant messages consumers actually enjoy.[5]. Samsung, for example, might compose a piece on retailer adoption of mobile payment technologies and feasibly argue that consumers seek its industry expertise on the subject. The problem with this argument, however, is that if consumers are so eager to read Samsung’s take, why use the publisher at all? Why not simply publish the piece on samsung.com and drive traffic to the page through social media and banner advertisements?[6]. | |
<
< | Research suggests that there is something more insidious going on. In fact, the evidence suggests that readers simply do not realize they are looking at ads. As one study states, “no matter what steps publishers have taken, there is still significant confusion on the part of readers as to what constitutes an article and what constitutes an ad.”[7]. If they knew the native ads were not real editorial content, one can imagine consumers would prefer to avoid them, a conclusion reached time and time again in the literature.[8]. | >
> | Research suggests that there is something more insidious going on. In fact, the evidence suggests that readers simply do not realize they are looking at ads. As one study states, “no matter what steps publishers have taken, there is still significant confusion on the part of readers as to what constitutes an article and what constitutes [a native] ad.”[7]. If they knew the ads were not real editorial content, consumers, one can imagine, would prefer to avoid them, a conclusion implied time and time again in the literature.[8]. | | | | |
<
< | Based on all this, native advertising certainly feels like deception. If consumers cannot tell the difference between a native ad and editorial content or decipher whose interests are being served, they will be unable to make fully informed decisions. Furthermore, insofar as journalism is democratic society’s “organ of truth, [following] no caucuses but its own convictions” – that inviolable standard set by the great Joseph Pulitzer – native advertising stands in the way of a fully informed citizenry. The question must be asked: is a media that tricks readers really the type we want to save? | >
> | Based on all this, native advertising certainly feels like deception. If consumers cannot tell the difference between a native ad and editorial content or decipher whose interests are being served, they will be unable to make fully informed decisions. Furthermore, insofar as journalism is civil society’s “organ of truth, [following] no caucuses but its own convictions” – that inviolable standard set by the great Joseph Pulitzer – native advertising is contrary to the values inherent to our democracy. The question must arise: is a media that tricks readers really the type we want to save? | | | The Guidelines |
|
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| | |