Can the NYT shift native ad labeling debate?

That labeling is important. Most publishers, including Digiday, have tended to shy away from such direct labels, opting instead for “sponsored content,” “sponsor content,” “partner content” and other euphemisms. (Digiday uses “sponsored content.”) At a Federal Trade Commission hearing earlier this month on native advertising, labeling occupied much of the discussion. Nobody agreed on an approach. The Interactive Advertising Bureau’s first step toward standards also punted on the issue, concluding that it is dependent on the environment. The only IAB guideline is it should be clear to a “reasonable consumer.”

The Times is predictably taking the high road here. Previously, Forbes had chosen to call their native ad areas “Brand Voice.” (A main architect of the Forbes native ad strategy, Meredith Levien, is now evp of advertising at the Times.) By embracing the more straightforward “paid post” tag, the Times could push the market toward greater transparency in its labeling practice — and in the process allay some of the concerns regulators have over content-style advertising.