Advertise natively, don't track. It's that simple, no need for research. Our ancestors did it for hundreds of years. There is no acceptable level of tracking.
Native advertising trying to pretend its journalism by association is a much bigger problem than display advertising. Websites informing you about “great deals” with the voice normally reserved for actual journalistic endeavors (or even opinion pieces) in between their normal articles isn’t in any way desirable. Even big publishers don’t come clean about when articles are ads or not.
"Native advertising" has a very specific definition; GP assumed that standard usage. If GGP was intending to refer to advertising without tracking, that would be a non-standard definition.
On what grounds do you make this sweeping absolute statement? I'm personally willing to accept lots of tracking by Google, Facebook, etc. in exchange for free or cheaper services.
It's fine that you are, but some of us are not. I'm fine seeing plain ads, just not traking ads. If the website owner doen't want to show plain ads then that's their choice.
(note, I don't use an ad blocker, just a tracking blocker)
E.g. https://www.ctrl.blog/entry/pcmag-vpn-review