A recent Harvard Business Review article discusses the differences between content marketing and native advertising. They explain: “whereas content marketing usually tries to secure dozens of media pickups, native advertising promotes content by paying to partner with a single publisher.”
In this example, an up-and-coming men’s clothing company sponsors a post on the lifestyle blog, Gear Patrol. It’s one article about how their performance outerwear is created, and why it beats out the competition. This type of advertising, “native advertising”, can be effective in drawing hits from a popular website like Gear Patrol and improving brand awareness. But according to Harvard Business Review, it’s not the most effective way to improve your brand’s standing in consumers’ minds.
Content marketing firm, Fractl, outlines the pros and cons of both content marketing and native advertising in this chart:
Fractl, along with another content marketing firm, Moz, looked at online interactions and results from 13 native advertisements by Intel with sponsored content leader Buzzfeed compared to Fractl’s 11 content marketing campaigns for Movoto. Fractl campaigns for Movoto averaged 146 pickups and 17,934 social shares, while BuzzFeed’s campaigns for Intel resulted in one pickup on average and 12,481 social shares.
While native advertising requires less work, content marketing delivers to a stronger presence across more publishings. It can include a larger amount of blog posts, whitepages, social posts, and more. Rather than limiting yourself to one source with a large following, diversify your output and touch more potential leads.
In our last post, we discussed how content marketing was only one piece of the inbound marketing pie, but a very important one. Soon, we’ll learn how to go deep with content marketing using social media.