This gives me some disquiet. I realise that this is what advertisers want - high quality ads that can't be blocked, but I think its harmful. In general, I avoid going to sites that have a policy of doing this.

It reminds me of Ogilvy's book on advertising [1]; Ogilvy's experience taught him that informative ads that explained the advantages of the product were most successful with customers. Sponsored content is exactly that, and the opposite might be something like clickbait [2].

Sponsored articles are accessed voluntarily by the customer clicking on them and reading them, and returning to the site; they are unobstrusive being mostly made of text and of (relatively) higher editorial quality, with good photography and so on. I wonder if they are the future of advertising.

On the topic of being unable to filter advertorial content from, well, content, I don't think it's as clear cut as ads vs not-ads, since every writer has their own set of opinions and presents their world view only (with few exceptions). A necessary life skill is critical thinking, learning to dissect an argument, examine its assumptions and data, and come to an independent conclusion as to the point it is making.

[1] core principles are summarized in his "house ad": http://smartonlinesuccess.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/dav...

[2] famously (NSFW): http://www.lazygamer.net/general-news/a-history-of-evony-ads...

The ads are not only happening in articles, it is also happening on Vine, where companies sponsor videos of popular users:

http://mashable.com/2014/07/22/sneaky-vine-ads

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2YhqXUekgEc

[1] http://www.dataprivacymonitor.com/social-media/ftc-clarifies...

>§4. An advertisement shall be designed, in a way that it will be clearly recognisable as an advertisement of whatever form and whatever media in which it is placed."

If you receive a review-copy you should state that, and if you get a discount you should also write that. I am not sure about if the company already pays for advertisement, but they want to stop hidden advertisements.

Some bloggers have received hefty fines for violating this, but it seems like the readers are more used to the concept now.

On all Danish produced TV production created after 01/07-2013, product placement is banned. This includes films as well, since they can be broadcasted.

But foreign produced films and series are not included in this, so we can still be able to enjoy James Bond on TV.

The trade association suggested to show a notice in the program, or afterwards, when they used product placement, but it was never put in law, and was it was banned instead.

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/nov/26/vloggers-must-t...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-30203816

https://www.asa.org.uk/News-resources/Media-Centre/2014/Maki...

You can link to that how you like. I can't, I need to make sure there's a difference between promoted content and my real content.

"#32 Yes people read long copy [...] (This page contains 1909 words and you are reading it.)[...]"

Found a text transcript here, mentions late '60s publication: http://www.infomarketingblog.com/ogilvy-mather-direct-ad-4-h...

For example, he mentions in his books that people enjoy having something to read whilst waiting for a bus. I personally love long wordy ads in the metro or on the bus as they help me pass time between stops. Even when the content is utter crap.

He sold Rolls-Royce by going and talking to their engineers - at the plant! - and figuring out what made the cars special. Then he wrote a snappy line that captured the gist of it, and some text underneath for those interested enough to keep reading. The ad [1] is now a classic in the industry.

Interestingly, his position was that he would never do political advertising. Key to the success of his ads were telling the "truth" about the advantages of your product (sure, embellish it, but do not lie as you get found out) and he was disgusted by the fact all political campaigns were entirely made of lies and often attacks.

[1] http://bordiniuc.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/1ss01.jpg

So he said, and maybe even believes, yet the magazine will remain nameless, and from looking at the website even a knowledgeable person wasn't able to tell it's all sponsored content.

> It could be a piece on Tesla

Wait, since when Tesla does native ads? Do they do ads at all?

[0] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_F5GxCwizc

Take interesting threads from the main site and edit comments to make it more palatable for the wider audience.

It generates quite a revenue from affiliate contracts, I hear.

There is nothing weird about building news sites on Wordpress.

EDIT: The Wired article is starting to make its way around [1]

[0] https://www.reddit.com/search?q=upvoted.com&sort=new&t=week

[1] https://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/3nnw6v/reddit_l...

I think it depends on whether reddit is being smart (targeting pinterest) vs retarded (targeting 9gag).

Curated reddit. It solves so many problems and can offer a lot of value to everybody.

- People who want "clean" and moderated reddit get what they want,

- advertisers get what they want,

- and, hopefully, reddit users get what they want(because there will be less pressure to moderate reddit.com).

At the very least they will capture all the value that buzzfeed and other bad blogs are currently taking from reddit.

Everybody wins.

I very much doubt it; the pressure to moderate harder comes from within redditors as well whenever the toxic subreddits leak.

I think the thing that would set Upvoted apart, and that's basically the one reason it could work, is the fact that under the hood it is Reddit. Reddit has an enormous community that practically supplies stories and also validates them as "traffic-worthy".

I've seen several articles on other news sites that were clearly inspired by a popular post on Reddit, though I can't currently find a good example. If other people are doing it, why not Reddit themselves?

I would have expected a custom landing page though.

  ;; QUESTION SECTION:
  ;upvoted.com.                   IN      A

  ;; ANSWER SECTION:
  upvoted.com.            300     IN      A       192.0.79.33
  upvoted.com.            300     IN      A       192.0.79.32

Reddit has web aggregation and communities pretty much sewn up as a market. How can they grow? By leveraging their insight into that traffic to create their own publication. I think they see their audience for Upvoted as people who know what Reddit is, and perhaps use it, but aren't power users and just like to have interesting and entertaining stuff presented to them.

Best of luck to them, I certainly don't think Upvoted's success is written in stone (especially given Reddit's history of half-delivering on their initiatives).

Why does the new Digg need answering though? It's now nothing but an obscure website that is only mentioned in connection to how big it once was.

Well the name says the stories have already been upvoted, so no system of the sorts are really implied anyway. I'm sure there are more takes on that though.

Stopped reading there.

Everything else on their radar is an editorial outlet, the home shopping network or the classifieds section. The closest they get to interacting with real people is Twitter and Facebook. Which appeal to the user's vanity, and following mechanics keep them in some approximation of the social bubbles they're in offline.

But Reddit has pseudonymous randos, with too many different names for a user to meaningfully fit in their brain, so it becomes a single voice to them. And they have ideas that aren't carefully crafted for palatability before presenting them. So reddit becomes "id."

That's quite an impressive euphemism for some of the stuff that you might see if you were to hit the "random NFSW" link. Not to mention the racial and misogyny hate groups that turn up, or the ubiquity of NSFW usernames.

But since you mention it, trendy clickable blogs can and do sell hate, sex and gratuitousness all the time, it is all in how they package it. NSFW is by definition the sorts of images and words that can't be repackaged in a way cubical dwellers can have on-screen while slacking, but site like The Chive still run right up to the NSFA (Not Safe For Advertiser) line with it.

I mean, how can a website with 200 million users be considered a "dark corner"? Absurd.

https://s3.amazonaws.com/redditstatic/award/9_year_club-40.p...

I don't think it's an entirely absurd statement.

On the Internet, nobody knows your age.

I know that first hand and see this as nothing new. Digg, Reddit or whichever are not immune from pressures to perform fiscally. This is probably just a first step, let's see if it works for them.

Whoever thinks Reddit is especially racist, sexist or whatever should just go out more often, or get out of their San Francisco political correctness bubble.