Five truths about native advertising

1. myth: Native Ads reduce the credibility of a publisherFalse. Native ads have no impact on the credibility of the publisher. The ads are clearly labeled as advertising. If anything, poorly done native ads would be more likely to damage the advertiser's brand image and are therefore inherently subject to high quality standards by companies. In most native ads concepts, moreover, the editorial teams always have a veto right and can reject campaigns that do not meet their quality standards.2. myth: Native Ads are the downfall of journalismWrong. Rather, the Native Ads revenue model actually helps publishers finance independent journalism through additional advertising revenue in the long run. Not to mention that publishers have always allowed branded content in the form of content collaborations. Native ads now only make revenues from the segment scalable. On top of that, popular branded content brings publishers new readers and attracts users to their websites, who stay there longer and increasingly consume the journalistic amounts as well.Myth 3: Native Ads equals surreptitious advertising Wrong. Critics like to equate native ads with surreptitious advertising. But there are clear rules: According to ORF law and the German Interstate Broadcasting Treaty, surreptitious advertising refers to "the mention or presentation of goods [...] of a manufacturer of goods or a provider of services in programs if it is intentionally intended by the broadcaster for advertising purposes and, in the absence of labeling, may mislead the general public as to the actual purpose of such mention or presentation." Native ads do not seek to deceive the reader, as surreptitious advertising does, for example, because they are always labeled "advertisement."Myth 4: Native ads are uninspired advertorials that do not take advantage of the multimedia possibilities of the web. Wrong. If only because bad advertorials are far too expensive for advertisers not to use them professionally. Poorly produced content worlds are punished by users with poor click rates, low dwell times and low social sharing rates. Native advertising therefore only pays off for brands if the content goes viral and the earned media share of the campaigns is significant. Many companies have true content treasures that no reader ever gets to see. Companies like VW, for example, produce very high-quality content around the topic of automobiles in their employee and customer magazines. Red Bull staged the jump from the stratosphere with Felix Baumgärtner in a media-appropriate way, and Edeka's new "super awesome" advertising report with Friedrich Lichtenstein reached millions of views on YouTube. In recent years, a lot of multimedia brand content has been created. Now this content is being given an ideal distribution platform through native advertising.5. myth: Native ads are recognized by search engines as duplicate contentNative ads delivered via ad server technology are not indexed by search engines and therefore do not lead to duplicate content problems. The content and also the teasers are usually loaded by the technologies via Javascript (similar to an advertising banner) and are not accessible for Google, for example. Nevertheless, each Native Ad receives its own URL and can thus be shared on social networks or sent via email. --------------