Guardian Labs began in early 2014 with its aim to work with clients to create sponsored content opportunities.

This is a trend in publishing with BuzzFeed and The Telegraph (and more besides) experimenting with in-house content creation tailored for brands.

The Guardian is seeking to rise above some of the disquiet around native advertising (is it a case of the emperor's new clothes?) by simply creating transparent sponsored content to a great standard.

Anna Watkins, who heads up Guardian Labs, was speaking at the IAB's Content Conference and this is what I took from her talk.

For a full intro to native advertising see the new Econsultancy report, Native Advertising: What it means for brands and publishers.

Trust and transparency

Guardian Labs is all about open ideas.

It's about having readers sharing Guardian content, interacting both on and off its own platforms. The publisher aims to achieve the opposite of the paywalls operated by the likes of News UK. Inviting users in is a must.

Anna used a quote from Marc Benioff, Salesforce CEO, to position the debate.

The social revolution is a trust revolution.

The Guardian has, incidentally, been rated the most trusted newspaper, so there's a good start. And the paper's sphere of influence benefits directly from this trust inspired in users - not only does The Guardian have more than six million direct Twitter followers, for example, but it has 169k followers that themselves have more than 500 followers each. Trust can go a long way.

Maintaining this trust whilst allowing brands in on the act is the goal of Guardian Labs.

How to work with brands?

In this spirit of openness, Anna spoke of the need to work with brands to help them understand the balance between financial value and the value they bring to customers and to society.

In essence, the nature of digital means that brands have ceded control of communications to the customer and this highlights the need for trust and authenticity.

This point ties in with the need to establish appropriate metrics for an ad campaign. As Nick Bradley of Northern & Shell points out, journalists are somewhat beholden to the page view and advertisers to the click. What Guardian Labs is trying to work from is the idea of approaching a content partnership in the right way, ensuring authentic, discerning and transparent content can still be supported by an advertiser.

EE and Unilever

Here are two examples of partnerships established by Guardian Labs, effectively native advertising done right.

Unilever and the Live Better Challenge

This partnership involved a whole range of content, traditional editorial, challenges to readers, associated prizes and also lesson plans for schools. Crucially there are no direct brand references in the pieces, a core part of Guardian's approach to attaining authenticity in native advertising.

The goal is to associate Unilever with responsibility, something the brand is already aiming to achieve with Project Sunlight. Anna spoke of excellent results so far for Unilever from this Guardian partnership.

live better challenge - Guardian

EE and Guardian Witness

Guardian Witness is a citizen journalist platform that's supported by EE. In many ways this is even more like a sponsorship opportunity in that the platform displays crowdsourced content, not brand-influenced editorial, and the brand association is much broader than even that in the Unilever example. EE simply understand that association with this open storytelling is a great thing for its brand.

Witness has been an incredible success, with a social reach of more than 40m and recently won Innovation of the Year at the UK Journalism Awards.

guardian witness

The future is transparency in measurement and message

Anna gave a tantalising glimpse into the next level for advertising and this kind of finely judged, brand associated content.

Ophan is an analytics dashboard used by the Labs team (in beta) that shows real-time readers and sharers and a whole tranche of analytics.

Ophan has been used in the example below of The Guardian's D-Day landing reveals, to show that although this story initially gained more traction on Twitter, once it was published on the Guardian’s official Facebook page, referrals from Facebook exploded with nearly a third of the interactive's page views being driven by Facebook. Another boost came from the Guardian’s Reddit community (in orange).

This system showed that two thirds of traffic for this piece came from outside of the UK and it had a strong uptake on mobile devices (42% of traffic).

Ophan is being rolled out to clients, so they are completely in the light when it comes to the direct impact of their advertising campaigns. An update to how DoubleClick works with OPHAN will also lead to more contextual and relevant advertising across the Guardian platform.

Watch this space as it seems The Guardian is aiming to set the standard when it comes to transparency and authenticity of content. 


guardian interactive d-day

Ben Davis

Published 30 July, 2014 by Ben Davis @ Econsultancy

Ben Davis is Editor at Econsultancy. He lives in Manchester, England. You can contact him at, follow at @herrhuld or connect via LinkedIn.

1244 more posts from this author

You might be interested in

Comments (3)



I personally liked the Guardian witness concept in the beginning and thought it was a great concept.

However, shame that their user content and copyright clause is way more worse than the ones from Facebook or Instagram, stripping the contributor of all rights and granting the Guardian "an unconditional, irrevocable, non-exclusive, royalty-free, fully transferable, perpetual worldwide licence to use".

This sheds a different light onto the award winning crowd journalism concept from an established publishing house and in my eyes is just lazy journalism.

about 4 years ago

dan barker

dan barker, E-Business Consultant at Dan Barker

Just a note to say I agree with Mon. (I wrote about it at the time - - I was surprised, and am still surprised, there wasn't more fuss about it).

It's a pale caveat to make, but their licence doesn't technically strip the user of rights, but it does give Guardian equal rights (for free) on any content as if they themselves were the creator. In other words: 'Witness' has built up an enormous chest of images/copy/video that the Guardian can use for anything they want, including reselling, using for advertising, etc, without the need to compensate the actual creators.

In terms of 'Native Adveritising', I'm not sure what I'd call 'Witness'. This isn't native guardian content - the entire platform is a basically an ad in & of itself - and the content is 100% from users, rather than from journalists.

I'm not sure it's lazy journalism. I got the feeling at the time that the people launching 'Witness' hadn't actually fully understood the implications of the Ts & Cs. But I find it odd that they treat the licence conditions a bit like "yeah, ignore that stuff, it's just the legal bit", when the guardian is so focussed on ethics & motivations elsewhere.

about 4 years ago

Ben Davis

Ben Davis, Editor at EconsultancyStaff


Yep, I agree that 'native advertising' probably isn't the right term for Witness.

I've got a post in draft about terminology - in-stream, native formats, sponsored or promoted content.

It would certainly be interesting to hear of journalists that have done well out of Guardian Witness. And those that haven't.

about 4 years ago

Save or Cancel

Enjoying this article?

Get more just like this, delivered to your inbox.

Keep up to date with the latest analysis, inspiration and learning from the Econsultancy blog with our free Digital Pulse newsletter. You will receive a hand-picked digest of the latest and greatest articles, as well as snippets of new market data, best practice guides and trends research.