“Blurred lines”: How advertising practitioners navigate ethical dilemmas in native advertising

This exploratory study seeks to understand how advertising practitioners negotiate their role in the creation and dissemination of native advertising, a practice that utilizes deception to persuade. Using moral ecology as a theoretical lens, this work explores practitioner positions regarding the practice of native advertising and considers factors that inform these viewpoints. Findings from semi-structured qualitative interviews with practitioners revealed that participants approached their position on native advertising, oscillating between views as a practitioner, while then contradicting some positions based on their views as a consumer. A lack of formal agency policies and guidelines led to ambiguity among practitioners, reinforcing the blurred lines around native advertising. This blurring led to practitioners adopting a common-sense approach to their ethical decision-making, which was shaped by the organizational climate and client demands. Senior practitioners had a more nuanced understanding of native advertising and were able to view it more critically, whereas junior employees emphasized performance and maintaining client satisfaction. Implications for theory and practice are proposed based on these initial findings.