> I don't understand the "sponsored" content gambit, but I do recall reading various print magazines that had bundled content inside of them that looked very mu

> I don't understand the "sponsored" content gambit, but I do recall reading various print magazines that had bundled content inside of them that looked very much like "real" articles but were basically sponsored ads. But I don't understand it. I would think that any ad that looks like your material fundamentally is misleading your readers by conflating your brand, your mission, your reputation with its own. Personally, I don't mind the print ads too much, although they are annoying. There are some physical mitigations that make them obvious - they are typeset differently, have a "special advertisement section" footer, and are sometimes printed on a different stock than the regular magazine. It is easy to detect where they begin and end. The Atlantic's article has almost none of these features. The only way I knew that it was sponsored was because of HN, and I had to go back and see the "Sponsored" banner near the top. Still, "Sponsored" doesn't really mean much either. The closest thing to being an magazine ad would be those full-screen things that sites like Forbes have, with a "continue to site" link at the top.