Our media's sad, unsavoury relationship with 'native' ad content

Please chip in to support more articles like this. Support rabble.ca for as little as $5 per month!

Like this article? rabble is reader-supported journalism. Chip in to keep stories like these coming.

We all know an uncle or aunt who not only has a drinking problem, but denies it and has family members who ignore or enable the unhealthy behaviour.

These days I'm feeling like mainstream media in Canada is a bunch of drunken uncles, not incapacitated and embarrassing from alcohol consumption, but from their addiction to "native" ad content.

The CBC's recent Olympics deal with Sport Chek is the latest example. For the Rio Olympics, Sports Chek gave up on 30-60 advertising spots and instead produced "sizzle reels" -- rapidly edited clips with close-up shots of Canadian athletes displaying a range of intense emotions.

The thing is, those reels were created by Sport Chek (owned by Canadian Tire) in a "war room" inside CBC, using CBC content.

The idea of these reels, Fredick Lecoq, a senior VP for Canadian Tire, explained to The Globe and Mail, is for broadcasters to "better integrate brands within their programs."

"I used to talk to the guy who was selling ads," he said. "Now I'm talking to the production guys."

What that means is that Sport Chek is trying to make its ads look less like ads and more like actual CBC content.

That's the whole point of "native" ad content -- to fool viewers or readers into thinking that what they're watching isn't actually brand advertising, but all part of the coverage... in this case, coverage of the Olympics. To do that, CBC, a publicly owned corporation, has let Sport Chek use its facilities and content. 

But CBC isn't the only media company that has embraced native advertising. They're just the latest drunk uncle to the bar. In fact, when The Globe and Mail did a story about the CBC/Sport Chek deal it did so without irony, comment or critique. Which isn't surprising since it's hard for the pot to call the kettle drunk ass.

In April, 2014 The Globe and Mail published a piece called "Why one resort changed only five bulbs in two years." The piece wasn't really a Globe and Mail story, it was a piece of native advertising produced by GE. The piece ran online with a thin pale yellow banner stating it was sponsored content and a small "Brought to you by" with a GE logo on it. But I doubt most readers didn't noticed. 

This is a medium in which whole banner ads are ignored by page visitors. Little logos and pale ribbons won't even be on most folks' radar screens.

And, besides, the whole intention of the piece, thin pale banner or not, is to make readers think it's a real Globe and Mail piece. 

In fact, The Globe and Mail has a whole team of writers the paper will happily rent out to companies that want content created for them.

Even worse, a year earlier Postmedia basically handed over its energy coverage to the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers. A leaked PowerPoint presentation makes that clear. The title reads: "Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, Postmedia 2013 Energy Channel Sponsorship: Positioning Canada at the Forefront of Energy"

Of course, Postmedia argues that partnerships like this don't hurt its journalistic integrity. Globe and Mail management makes the same argument.

The Globe argues that none of the content is produced by newsroom journalists, so they're squeaky clean.

Even the New York Times is slipping into full denial mode. 

In a recent presentation called "The Challenging New Economics of Journalism," Mark Thompson, the CEO for The Grey Lady, wrote:

"[W]e believe that the digital advertising of the future will be dominated by stories conceived by advertisers, clearly labelled so they can be distinguished from newsroom journalism, but consumed alongside that journalism on their own merits."

All of this, of course, is like a church saying that there's nothing wrong with it running a profitable brothel in a room just off the manse.

But there is something wrong. Imagine, for example, that instead of letting Sport Chek produce "sizzle reels" at the CBC during the Olympics, the Crown corporation let Tim Hortons produce "happy" news spots for The National in an editing bay just down the hall from Peter Mansbridge.

Mainstream media can't have it both ways. They can't claim the "native" content is clearly labelled so as to avoid consumer confusion and, at the same time sell advertisers on the paper's strong brand history of great storytelling and writing.

It can't pretend that increasingly depending on native content to boost its bottom line will have no impact on how it produces news. Already, for example, freelancers who want to make a living have learned that native content creation pays way better than real journalism. And Postmedia's deal with the petroleum devil shows exactly what can happen when you take a slide down the well-oiled slope.

In the end, it's all sad and unsavoury, like Uncle Jim at a wedding, face down in a punch bowl, in his underpants claiming he just slipped.

Listen to an audio version of this column, read by the author.

Wayne MacPhail has been a print and online journalist for 25 years, and is a long-time writer for rabble.ca on technology and the Internet.

Photo: filip bossuyt/flickr

Like this article? rabble is reader-supported journalism. Chip in to keep stories like these coming.

Related Items

Thank you for reading this story…

More people are reading rabble.ca than ever and unlike many news organizations, we have never put up a paywall – at rabble we’ve always believed in making our reporting and analysis free to all, while striving to make it sustainable as well. Media isn’t free to produce. rabble’s total budget is likely less than what big corporate media spend on photocopying (we kid you not!) and we do not have any major foundation, sponsor or angel investor. Our main supporters are people and organizations -- like you. This is why we need your help. You are what keep us sustainable.

rabble.ca has staked its existence on you. We live or die on community support -- your support! We get hundreds of thousands of visitors and we believe in them. We believe in you. We believe people will put in what they can for the greater good. We call that sustainable.

So what is the easy answer for us? Depend on a community of visitors who care passionately about media that amplifies the voices of people struggling for change and justice. It really is that simple. When the people who visit rabble care enough to contribute a bit then it works for everyone.

And so we’re asking you if you could make a donation, right now, to help us carry forward on our mission. Make a donation today.


We welcome your comments! rabble.ca embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist, queer-positive, anti-imperialist and pro-labour stance, and encourages discussions which develop progressive thought. Our full comment policy can be found here. Learn more about Disqus on rabble.ca and your privacy here. Please keep in mind:


  • Tell the truth and avoid rumours.
  • Add context and background.
  • Report typos and logical fallacies.
  • Be respectful.
  • Respect copyright - link to articles.
  • Stay focused. Bring in-depth commentary to our discussion forum, babble.


  • Use oppressive/offensive language.
  • Libel or defame.
  • Bully or troll.
  • Post spam.
  • Engage trolls. Flag suspect activity instead.