I am curious how you see this happening. To me these ads are an embarrassment to the human species. The language you use suggests that you and I may live in entirely different universes.
Whats missing today are two ingredients.
1. better policing of the advertisers/quality and relevancy scores like Gooogle and Facebook have.
2. Relevancy targeting that actually works. If we ever reach a point where the native ads are supplemental content that add to the story you just finished reading, It will be a net positive.
If you are part of the world that believes all advertising is a nuisance and bad, no matter how relevant, than we do live in different universes, if not, than anytime an ad unit fits natively into an experience to the point of removing friction (and not requiring switching context) it will go through growing pains but eventually will be a net win for the user (because actually providing value to users will maximize revenues.)
So I would separate advertisements into good (new restaurant near you that you would like to know about) and bad (preying on human weaknesses). Which one is this kind of ad best suited for?
> providing value to users will maximize revenues.
I'm not so sure.
The "chumbox" ads seem to be literally all bad, selling things with net negative utility.
What are the socially valuable uses for this that are going to outcompete miracle pills and snake oil?