Twice this week I have been lulled into reading ad features because your thread title and the content itself had no labelling on it.
The most recent example, John Lewis, may well be useful content - and I have no issue at all with reading good, paid-for content - but I feel cheated when I get to the end and find out it is paid for content. I would think more highly of the brand, and MN, if you were more overt about what it really is.
ASA rules are clear around this kind of content -the consumer should be able to see at a glance that it is paid for content, and can then make the choice to read it or not.
Instead, we read what is presented as independent editorial, then get to the end and find it is in association with John Lewis, and feel we’ve been duped.