Line Bound to Blur Between Advertising and Editorial | MarketingProfs

matt grant is a thinker. it shows in everything he writes, including this piece on the use of long-form "advertorial" content. it seems to me (and to matt) that as the trend continues toward content marketing, sponsored content will risk convergence with "real" content. this excerpt is from an interview matt did with the atlantic's digital editor shortly before they ran a poorly received ad from the church of scientology.

“The reader needs to know what is an ad and what is not an ad,” he told me. “We are not trying to confuse the reader into reading advertising products and thinking they are reading editorial products.”

As far as interfering with the reading experience goes, he added, “I should say, ‘Don’t unduly interfere’ because some people believe that any ads interfere with the reader’s experience.”

I've seen studies indicating that magazine readers consider advertisements an integral part of media consumption. I expect this is more true for dedicated readers of vogue, but I've enjoyed my share of clever ads in the new yorker. 

I agree with matt's belief that there is nothing inherently wrong with pushing the line with content marketing. the key to success is what every content guru has been graciously displaying in his or her storefront for a while - be clever or go home.

via mpdailyfix.com click through for full article

(note: I am testing diigo.com's annotation features. please click through on the 'magazine readers link above and let me know if the yellow highlighting shows up about halfway down the page. thanks!)