WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The growing online usage of ads designed to blend in with the rest of a website’s content, a practice known as “native advertising,” may be illegal in some instances, the Federal Trade Commission warned on Wednesday.
The growing online usage of ads designed to blend in with the rest of a website’s content, a practice known as “native advertising,” may be illegal in some instances, the Federal Trade Commission warned on Wednesday.
The FTC said that a survey of online publishers found that 73 percent allowed native advertising, the digital descendent of the newspaper “advertorial” and television’s infomercials.
“Marketers have … moved past the banner ad into advertising that is more seamlessly, and inconspicuously, integrated into digital content,” FTC Chairwoman Edith Ramirez said in a speech that opened a conference on “Blurred Lines: Advertising or Content.”
Let us know what you think; your opinion matters.
First time I’ve seen anything about from regulatory agencies published in a
mainstream media source. It’s about time.
Ramirez said “the FTC was not contemplating specific regulations to deal with the issue in the online space”. Why not? It’s already gone too far.
In the uk, I don’t know if in all cases as I don’t read newspapers any more, it was the case that advertising material had the heading “Advertisement” heading the ‘article’,
Full page adverts were also covered. Ne reason to believe you were readin a news story.
The same principle should apply to internet advertising.
Ian
Some of the ads are very deceptive. A couple of times I have almost clicked on the wrong thing because ads with download buttons are perticularly bad. Sometimes the ad buttons are in a space where you are looking for a button that goes along with what you are looking at. Sometimes even on this page. Not today though.
I think I’ve been with you guys since you started are very close to when you started. I found you when I was looking for some stationery for my email.
You are so right, Sue. That sort of thing is beyond deceptive. It’s deliberate trickery.
My name and email address are hung up on this form from when I tried to send you a compliment on the piece you did about your walks. Can you see if you can remove it for me? Thanks, Sue
No Mike. Cloudeight has no control of the advertisers or theadvertising content that appear on this site. It’s the deceptive and manipulative way the ADVERTISERS are allowed to “create” and “publish” their content. The technology seems to be able to chose which ads appear based on the subject matter of a particular article being displayed on the same page the “advertising space” has been provided. It doesn’t matter which site you’re visiting.
Th ONLY websites where NO “advertising SPACE” has been permitted to appear are those making enough money to stay in business WITHOUT it. Cloudeight NEEDS outside income to stay in business. I APPLAUD them extensively for caring about it’s readers enough to set advertising boundaries wherever they can.
The issue here is NOT which sites need advertisements, or how much website space they have turned over to advertisers. The ISSUE is
sorry. I hit submit too soon by mistake.
The ISSUE is the deceptive manner in which advertisers are allowed to “create” and “publish” their ads…not the fault of the website they happen to appear on.
Clear your cookies Sue Smith. I think that will solve the problem..at least until next time you post something. Nothing to worry about though. YOU are the only one who sees your name and email address if it remains there after you post something.
Nobody uses it better than Cloudeight.