[megablahblah]

He gave an example ... sponsor content, a.k.a. branded entertainment. It's the only thing that works in world of online advertising right now.

But I think one of the main points is, be smart and use restraint when necessary. If a publisher comes to you and says "Hey, we have a new ad unit that takes over the page!" the advertiser should know that it's a bad idea and use restraint instead of buying up any new ad unit that's presented to them.

If you look at mobile advertising, the click-through rates are 10 times better than online. Why? Mainly because there is less screen, so there is less ad clutter. So it's an approach that works.

But basically, publishers and advertisers are lazy and instead of looking at data and figuring out creative ways to grow, they just spend more money to try to increase return.

[mrkurt]

It blows my mind that people actually mention sponsored content as a feasible alternative. It's true that ad blocking will ultimately drive many sites there, but I really value the firewall we have between our writers and ad sales. Not only that, but I really don't want to read a site running ads-that-look-like-content. It saddens me that so many seem to miss the implications of doing this.

It works ok for entertainment, but do you really want to read an article like "Why you shouldn't move your sites to the cloud, brought to you by IBM"?

[rick888]

"It blows my mind that people actually mention sponsored content as a feasible alternative. It's true that ad blocking will ultimately drive many sites there, but I really value the firewall we have between our writers and ad sales. Not only that, but I really don't want to read a site running ads-that-look-like-content. It saddens me that so many seem to miss the implications of doing this."

Well, it saddens me that people running adblockers will force many sites to do this to survive.

[Semiapies]

Sponsorships are reasonable, but branded content and sites seems like a minefield.