Fire Alarm Companies

was a story about yesterday's decision to execute the contents of the Atlantic sponsored by Scientology, which consisted of an infomercial quite wrong about Scientology "success" in last year. Comments on the piece has a lot of "wow this is just amazing!" comment moderation and suggesting that both pre-planned fan reaction. After a public outcry over the Atlantic going in that direction, the piece has been removed. Recently, it was also similar (but slightly different) "sponsored" posts on BuzzFeed, in which the cast names of some employees of the company on a list of "top 10" or "top 15" that hit together - often taking images from other sources (Reddit is very popular), without making much effort to credit happened to its content. There have even been some controversy over the recent decision by the Associated Press for sponsored tweets Samsung at CES.



It sounds as practical examples of "Featured Content" bad - as publications that people are increasingly entering the sponsored content. While it is good see publications to take risks and try something new, the only drawback is that it has the potential to completely shun companies to any form of sponsored content, even if you can do much better. For many years, for many years, we talked about how content is advertising and advertising content, and those who do well will go far. problem is that it is difficult to do well - often because vendors are so focused on school "advertising" old where you must continue to push his message and his message alone, lost in the fact that it does not have a more intense way. Much has been said lately about the "publicity native" - ??this is the buzzphrase around this type of content today. many say "infomercial" is not new, and c ' is true, but

1. true
2. Content
3. home is somewhat different. During the years when we talked about these concepts, everyone complained that "infomercial" suggesting that it is boring or misleading - and that was the problem with the above examples. however, when done right, should not be
is boring or misleading. And we get to this point. Five years ago suggest some basics of why the world needs to move towards this model, and I think still valid today:

The captive audience is dead. There is no captive audience online. Everyone surfing the web has billions of choices on what they can see, and they do not want to be viewing intrusive and annoying ads. Do ignore them, block them or go elsewhere.
advertising content. Can not think of ads as separate things any more. Without a captive audience, there is no such thing as "advertising" any more. It's just content. And there must be a good content / interesting / important if you want to find someone to pay attention to it.
advertising content. This may seem like a repeat of the previous point, and in a sense it is - but to highlight the other side. All content is advertising. Advertising something . Techdirt content "advertises" our business, even if you do not realize. Every bit of content announces something, whether voluntarily or not.
content must be useful / engaging / interesting. This simply binds everything together. If you want someone to pay attention to your content (which is advertising something, whether voluntarily or not) must be compelling and attractive.
The


problem

is that many vendors (and many publications) really seem to lose that last point. Content - whether advertising, native content, advertorials or otherwise - be useful / engaging / interesting
Find best price for : --Content--