Native Advertising

I’m not going to lie.  Native advertising scares me.  It scares me because it is journalism willingly and knowingly feeding the public either false or twisted knowledge.  It betrays almost everything the institution stands for and what Walter Williams wrote about in his creed.  Unfortunately, it has been happening for a while now and probably will not stop.  The business insiders article only confirmed my fears.

Realistically, it seems that journalism has been heading this way for some time.  Somebody has to pay for publications.  Those publications cannot rely on subscriptions anymore due to the pace and freedom of information thanks to the Internet.  It seems that only advertisers can bridge the gap.  Naturally, when a company pays for something that will be read by many, it reflects on them.  They want nothing but positive press.  They want their products and company shown in a good light.  Before native advertising came to prominence, publications were already subject to review by its advertisers whether they’d like to admit it or not.  Any publication with sane leadership would not run a story that attacked an advertiser.  This is a form of censorship.  My point is that companies have been impacting the news cycle for some time and will until the rise of a revolutionary new method of funding. 

As long as there is diversity in the ownership of companies, I do not think this is an Armageddon level of encroachment on journalistic freedom.  There are Liberal companies and there are conservative companies.  There are environmentally conscious companies and there are economically conscious companies.  There are companies run by minority CEO’s and there are companies that are run by WASP’s.  They all need to advertise.  They all need their voice heard.  What will presumably result from native advertising is two very distinct interpretations on the state of affairs.  Publication A will tout the benefits of their backers point of view.  Publication B will support the converse.  Ultimately, this puts the citizen in a powerful position to decide which makes the most sense to them.  However, this puts a great deal of responsibility on the citizen.  Gone are the days where they were spoon fed the neutral truth about an issue.  Publications will lambast eachother for perceived inaccuracies in their reporting.  An educated public will have to sift through it.  Thus, as a side effect of native advertising, education of the masses becomes critical.  It is now up to the citizen to find out what is true. 

Of course, truth is a very relative term.  What is true to one can be a blasphemy to another.  Again, does this really change much?  Do we not already live in a world where people deny Global Warming despite a mountain of evidence?  Do we not live in a world where, despite literally millions of years of data, people still doubt Darwin’s ideas of Natural selection?  I believe that the growth of Native advertising is a not a good event, but not one that should be mourned over.  Misinformation is already the norm.