I get it, local papers are struggling to survive and ad revenue is down. And there is a note on the page to identify that it is "sponsored content." But at first glance it's visually indistinguishable from any other story or op-ed the paper publishes. This is misleading to casual readers.

For context, there is an ongoing multi-decade legal fight to get the government to remove four large dams on the Snake River in the northwest US. The paid content here is written by a consortium representing organizations which have financial incentives to keep the dams in place.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snake_River#Proposed_dam_removal

I kind of expect this sort of hidden ad shenanigans these days. Which I shouldn't, of course. But as a result I find it more infuriating to have a link to the "article" next to the already opened very same "article." Come on, algorithm! That's just unforgivable.

Tech blogs have been doing this for years. I get it, they cater to people who block ads. I block ads. But now I just assume their reviews and coverage is all sponsored. Because you don’t really know.

This always makes me wannna choke the editor and also government for allow such article to exists.

A combine harvets ...

They can't even proofread their ads.

You have no law that forbids this?

Does AI even have editors?

No. I am not sure how we could even craft such a law in the current US legal climate. Political speech, and money tied to political speech, are nearly impossible to regulate in any meaningful way.

Just another reason why we need to promote critical thinking and media literacy skills.