Native advertising has established itself in recent years as a key piece in online advertising strategy. The pull of the format is explained within the same logic that has established content marketing. Consumers are tired of traditional advertising and do not receive it in a positive way. Marketers must find ways to get their messages across and to get consumers to connect with them. Native advertising integrates South-Africa Mobile Database in a simpler way and has managed to bypass those barriers. But is it all worth it in native advertising? The truth is that no: a study has just analyzed how consumers respond to different ads and the different channels that the media and advertisers use to serve this type of ad and has found powerful differences. The essence of what makes native advertising work is that it is integrated with the content of the channel it is served on. That is, it seems like one more content, or at least it doesn’t clash too much with the trend of that channel. That is why it is less annoying and less disruptive. 
However, and as a study has just shown, fitting the channel should not imply that it is like the channel: if it is not easy to separate what is native advertising from what is not, consumers react in a negative way. This is what a study prepared by experts from two South Korean universities has just Brother Cell Phone List shown and which has just been published in the Journal of Advertising Research (JAR). Native advertising, they conclude, can arouse a negative response from the consumer if it is too similar to organic content. If it is too similar, the reactions it arouses are those of disappointment and deception.
In addition, it is not only that consumers feel more that they are being cheated, but also that the results that are achieved are also much more negative. Ads that use a format that differentiates them achieve better data on click intent and annoyance perception (they are less irritating). How the way we process information changes
Why is this happening? Researchers have a theory. To manage the information flows and the things that are relevant, our brain must make an effort. We must be vigilant and work for it. That is, we are perceiving the information and doing a processing job. Given the amount of information available, this implies that our brain is overworked. When advertising is not exactly the same as informational content, the brain is able to differentiate it. You know that it is different and that you can treat it in a different way. But that also has a negative point: brand recognition and recall is reduced. Because we don’t pay the same attention to it, we process it less firmly. Therefore, marketers must consider very well what they want to achieve and how they will integrate native advertising into their advertising campaigns. They must be able to take advantage of all the possible benefits, but without burning their consumers for it.
