Stealth Advertising
Stealth advertising presents paid promotion as independent editorial content without making the sponsorship clear. Native advertising resembles its surrounding publication; it becomes deceptive when readers cannot recognize it as advertising.
THE IDEA
Stealth Advertising
WHEN ADS MASQUERADE AS NEWS
Five women peer out from a picture on Teen Vogue’s website: “How Facebook Is Helping Ensure the Integrity of the 2020 Election.” The article praises Facebook’s efforts to combat misinformation by profiling the women leading the charge. Posting on social media in January 2020, Sheryl Sandberg, Facebook’s chief operating officer, gushed: “Great Teen Vogue piece about five incredible women.”[1]
The article let on nothing of Facebook’s problems: nothing about the site letting Russian propaganda run amok, nothing about allowing landlords to discriminate by placing restrictive ads, nothing about how the site experimented on users without their knowledge.[2] Pure puffery: sweet, light, vapid.
A perplexed reader named Lauren Murphy detected something fishy. She asked on Twitter, “What is this @TeenVogue . . . ?” The official Teen Vogue account replied in a tweet deleted soon thereafter: “Literally idk.” Lots of people, however, did know—including Sheryl Sandberg. Sandberg was smitten by the piece because her company had paid for it.[3]
Figure 9.1 Teen Vogue article touting Facebook (Abrams and Kang, “The Mystery of Teen Vogue’s Disappearing Facebook Article”)
Teen Vogue, it turns out, had struck two deals. First, with Facebook. Second, with the devil—by agreeing to deceive readers with ads that look like legitimate news stories. “Stealth ads,” unlike their detested but more recognizable cousins—flashing banner ads, multicolored display ads, obnoxious pop-ups—are designed to fade unobtrusively into the surrounding news content. The article looks like a news story, written by an independent and trustworthy journalist, when in reality it’s tainted by the agenda of the company that paid for it. You think you’re being informed only to find out—if you do find out—you’re being swindled.
Figure 9.2 Tweet by @laurenmurphypho asking @TeenVogue about the Teen Vogue Facebook article (https://twitter.com/laurenmurphypho/status/1214956959700529152)
Figure 9.3 @TeenVogue’s response to @laurenmurphypho’s question about the Teen Vogue Facebook article. (Tweet has been deleted.)
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC), the government agency responsible for regulating these kinds of things, stipulates that “native ads” (so called because they appear “native” to the website, sharing the same fonts, color schemes, style, etc.) must carry a warning label—an indication that alerts readers they’re reading an ad. But in Teen Vogue’s case, the warning label went AWOL. Then it mysteriously reappeared. Then, just as mysteriously, it disappeared again. When the Twitterverse caught wind of this fiasco and erupted in outrage, Teen Vogue removed the Facebook “story” and hung its head in shame.
Native ads were created for one simple reason: we ignore regular ads. We’ve installed extensions to zap them. Your mouse steers clear of ads like real mice steer clear of cats. The click-through rate on regular digital ads is stupendously low, a minuscule fraction of 1 percent. Yet, people do click on native ads. How come? Could it be, as media expert Bob Garfield put it in an article aptly titled “A Conspiracy of Deception,” that people “don’t realize native ads are ads”?[4]
When to use it
Browsing an online magazine and noticing an article that seems promotional but lacks a disclosure label.
Scrolling through a news aggregator and seeing a story that looks like a news report but is actually a paid advertorial.
Watching a sponsored YouTube video that doesn't clearly state it's a paid partnership.
Reading social media posts that appear to be personal recommendations but are actually paid endorsements.
FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE
In practice
The Teen Vogue Facebook Article Scandal
Caulfield and Wineburg describe a January 2020 incident in which Teen Vogue published an article praising Facebook's efforts to combat election misinformation, profiling five women leading the charge. The article was actually a paid native advertisement from Facebook, but it lacked a clear disclosure label, leading readers to believe it was independent journalism. A reader named Lauren Murphy noticed something amiss and tweeted about it, and the Teen Vogue account replied 'Literally idk' before deleting the tweet. After public outcry, Teen Vogue removed the article.
A MOMENT TO REFLECT
Put it to work.
When you come across an article that seems unusually positive about a company or product, what clues can you look for to determine if it's a stealth advertisement?
Why might stealth advertising be considered more ethically problematic than traditional advertising?
How can you verify whether a piece of content you're reading is sponsored or independent?
Often confused with
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Source texts
- Verified How to Think Straight, Get Duped Less, and Make Better Decisions about What to Believe Online (Mike Caulfield, Sam Wineburg)