It honestly depends on how the native ad is presented.
If it's presented in such a way that the user is not able to immediately and obviously tell it's an advertisement, and is presenting misleading and unsourced facts or even downright lies, then it's deceptive marketing practices and nothing short of propaganda.
I can tell you from personal experience that I fucking loathe over half the native ads I've come across thus far.
It seems like a large portion of those ads are so up their own ass, it often sounds like they are nothing but a watered-down version of borderline-TOO-Ridiculous North Korean propaganda antics we've come to know and love.
Other times, I get introduced to products that I would likely be dismissive of if given only a short amount of time to decide interest or not.
Still, a majority of the time, I happen across native advertisements while reading other articles, and it isn't until the very end that there's some tiny smidgeon blurb about how this article isn't actually an article, it's an ad.
At which point, I usually feel duped and slightly pissed.
When the native ads are obviously presented as AN ADVERTISEMENT, AAAAND stated as such in the very beginning, then it's legit and I don't mind.
Fuck all the rest of the native ads I've seen though; It's just a stealthier kind of the same AIDS/cancer we all hate.
Extra, extra, read all about it. Consumers prefer optional ads to mandatory ones. This is breaking news people.
I wonder if it occurred to ask consumers what their preference is on no ads.