> I don't understand the "sponsored" content gambit, but I do recall reading various print magazines that had bundled content inside of them that looked very much like "real" articles but were basically sponsored ads. But I don't understand it. I would think that any ad that looks like your material fundamentally is misleading your readers by conflating your brand, your mission, your reputation with its own.
Personally, I don't mind the print ads too much, although they are annoying. There are some physical mitigations that make them obvious - they are typeset differently, have a "special advertisement section" footer, and are sometimes printed on a different stock than the regular magazine. It is easy to detect where they begin and end.
The Atlantic's article has almost none of these features. The only way I knew that it was sponsored was because of HN, and I had to go back and see the "Sponsored" banner near the top. Still, "Sponsored" doesn't really mean much either.
The closest thing to being an magazine ad would be those full-screen things that sites like Forbes have, with a "continue to site" link at the top.
It does sell advertising, but it is not advertising itself. Note that he also offers subscriptions. So it's basically a one-man magazine of the specialist reviews variety.
This isn't a new phenomenon. I've also read magazines with advertisements disguised as articles, except for the small "advertisement" label at the top.
Of course not. But it's extremely clear to me that the primary focus of the article is promoting the game, and the story is secondary.
After having seen a lot of these articles, it becomes easier to distinguish the real story ones from the "ad" ones. And thats why they do it, its effective, so many people can't tell its a paid advert.
I care. If it's an ad, that means that its goal is to lead you to a purchase, which means that you have to be extra skeptical of anything that the article is saying.
Such articles very rarely provide anything but the most minimal value, anyway.
The article here is an ad. I guess it's not a badly written advertisement, but it still reads as an advertisement which isn't exactly a desirable trait in an article.
When the article read like a press release for the company's product that had full page ads in the same issue, using similar phrases and mentioning the same points.
The line between the two is very blurred. For example, a review of a new video card, is really just an advert.
reply