The Federal Trade Commission ( FTC ) which is the consumer protection body describes native advertising as something  ‘marketers and publishers are using as innovative methods to create, format and deliver digital advertising. One form is native advertising, content that bears similarity to news, feature articles, product reviews, entertainment and other material that surround it online.’

They look like ‘ editorial ‘ — the same style, font, language and design. Journalists are hired to write the copy of native advertising. Either they are written in readable form or are watchable as videos.

Online advertising that is in the format of banners and display ads bring in pathetic revenues. They bring in a fraction of the money of a print ad. The screen size is also small. There are ad blocking softwares too. In such a scenario native advertising is contributing a lot to the growth of digital advertising. These ads using video are welcome for the youngsters. They fetch high CPM and attract rates just like print.

How to distinguish the editorial and advertising then? Is there a wall to divide these two? Readers are thus at the mercy of the media. What is sacrificed is objectivity and truthfulness. Perhaps, this is the price the readers pay for not paying for the news by subscription. If there is a disclosure that what you are reading or watching is an ad, it is okay. There should be a limit on its proportion, say 3 — 10 per cent of the total content. Disclosures are not prominent. If they are, the ads would not work. In the US, FTC has issued guidelines about how disclosures should be made. ASCI’s guidelines about honesty in representation and harmful products cover in its scope native advertising.