More than a third of UK & US online new readers have felt 'disappointed or deceived' by native ad formats

"More than a third of British and American readers of online news say they have felt “disappointed or deceived” after reading an article that turned out to be paid for by an advertiser, according to a new study by Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism at Oxford University.
The special research, conducted for the Reuters Institute by YouGov as part of the 4 th Digital News Report, shows just how confused readers are by the labelling of so-called sponsored content and suggests that when it comes to native advertising, the risk of damaging reputations are far higher for news websites than for advertisers.
One encouraging finding for publishers is that there is far more acceptance of sponsored content outside core news – in areas such as travel, food, fashion and entertainment.
With publishers finding it harder to make money from traditional banner advertising, focus is switching to new forms of ‘native’ advertising where brand messages look more like regular content – sitting in the same templates and using the same formats that might be used for a standard piece of journalism or a user-generated post on social media.
The New York Times, the Guardian and the Wall Street Journal have set up teams to produce sponsored online content while digital-born companies like Quartz and Buzzfeed already make the majority of their money from native advertising formats."
Source:  Press release from the Reuters Institute, 16th June 2015