Program Prometon onthe neat,
PROGRAM PROMOTION ON THE INTERNET
Douglas A. Ferguson
Department of Communication
College of Charleston
Paper presented tothe annual meeting ofthe
Southern States Communication Association
‘March 2000
New OrleansProgram Promotion onthe nee. 2
{In July 1999, Martin Polon wrote: “The whole point of a website i to increase viewer
loyalty to your station and its services, thus counteracting declining numbers for network
television.” This goal for using the intemet to promote local aulienees has prown over year of
"web design developments, for both dio and television stations. From a simple isting and a few
links the local broadeas station's presence onthe internet has Rourished into a sophisticated
promotion tol, Broadcast audiences can wse te internet to find content (audio and video) that
they missed on-air, ied to conventional broadcast programaring that they are more likely to watch
on-air in the future.
Although the lieratue onthe intemet i already enormous and sweling daly, very tle
thas been published-onlne or on paper
bout media promotion via the web, But the isue i
important because trade reports suggest that as many’as 84 million adults athe United States
have accessed online services in 1999 IneliQuest, 1995), up fom 66 milion adults the previous
year, As result of technological convergence the web is changing quickly, and there is a need
to measure its present form to understand and perhaps inuence its changes. As Bucy, Lang,
Potter, nd Grabe (1998) report, much ofthe research about the industry has been conducted by
commercial services anti propriety or hs been qualitative and ancedotal in nature, Aside
from the many studies of such phenomena as bulletin boards and news groups (se, for example,
James, Wiring, & Forest, 1985), surveys ofenine media sites tend to be broad and to disregard
program promotion or subsume it within analyses of much anger units oF a media company’s
entire web, The avallsity of ews content on station websites has become a fous atea for a
few studies (e.g, Nckamp, 1996, and Rosales & Pitts, 1997), Kiernan and Levy (1999)Progam Promotion onthe Ines, 3
‘examined journalistic competition among websites and found no relationship between site
characteristics and competition. Advertising and e-mail have been of particular interest (see
Aikat, 1995; Niekamp, 1996), and only a very few studies look at online promotion of
programs~although there area great many online comments (See htp/www.promolounge.com),
Yet in creating audience size, the primary function of program promotion, is one ofthe forces
Ariving broadcast and eable networks to utilize the web atthe present time,
Nowadays, three areas of online media promotion canbe identified: web pages that
‘promote individual television programs or station lineups; web pages that promote media
‘companies, such as NBC’s or Time Warner's online sites oF those of individual local television
and radio stations; and web pages that promote new forms of entertainment-comparable to
television programs~on the web itseli Because the last ofthese barely exists yet and few
generalizations could be drawn, and because the fist copic is covered elsewhere, this paper
‘concentrates on program promotion by tations via the web.
‘Although scholar such as Bucy, etal, (1998) ask whether the capabilites of the web are
‘being fully exploited in media sites, the lager underlying issue about web promotion is whether
the television channel model for media content i really applicable to the intemet. Broadcasters
seek to buy their way into the future (via mergers, buyouts, join operating agreements and S0 on),
but its not clear wht the future is. Are thousands of web-age “channels” really comparable to
the broadcastcuble model of dozens of channels? This question was posed in a cover story on
measuring advertising cn web sites (Internet World, 1998). 1t follows that the attributes of webs
pages promoting programs may need to differ from the attributes of print and on-air promotion.Program Promotion on he nent 4
Just as Rank (1991) aad other authors of advertising texts lay out the primary strategies and
tactics of persuasion in advertising, in similar fashion, Eastman, Ferguson, and Klein (1999) spell
‘out the primary practices and strategies of promotion by broadcasters and cable operators. But
‘whether these strategies and tactics fit the online world is an open question, In one key ease
study, Wolfe (1997) recounted NBC's history of web promotion and concluded that web use has
matured, and that web users expect sophistication in design and have litle tolerance for such
things as errors or dey in page updates.
McClung (1997) reanalyzed a sample of television station web sites and concluded that
their selrepresentation was both inadequate and misleading. Murphy (1998) looked at radio web
sites and attempted to assess their value as promotional tools. In addition, Bates and King (1996)
and Bates, Chambers, Emery, Jones, MeClung, & Park (1997) have examined local television
stations’ use of the web, including how the viewing of programs can be promoted. But the most
useful study to date comes from Bucy, etal (1998) because it analyzes some ofthe design and
promotional characteristics of media web sites. It provides a model for future esearch of more
selective pages of media web sites, and is adapted here to examine program promotion on the
web,
After reviewing in detail the limited Iterature regarding online promotion of progeams and
stations vis the internet, I plan to analyze the content ofa sample of 290 television station web
sites, including their we of inks to broadcast networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, UPN, WB, and
PBS). The feus will bon pages in each website that promote specific television programs, not
fon pages that provide generic lineup information or background mates
on the station’ historyProgr Pmt oh nrc, 5
‘or management, talent or technology. ‘The methodology and atribues wll draw on Bucy et al
(1998), Bates & King (1996), Nickamp (1996), and Bates, Chambers, et al. (1997). Spevifcally,
content analysis wll count the numberof sereens and fame for each website, the number of
photographs, ext units fillmotion video, and merchandise. Analysis wll also focus on design
atubutes suchas the use of background colors, the warmth or coolness of clos, animation,
linking text, and degre of scrolling, as well as ineractve features such as feedback and e-mail
directly related to the programmer.
“The results ofthis analysis willbe colapsed into categories that ean be compare tothe
findings of previous research, This analysis assesses the sophistiaton ofthe parts of station web
sites devoted to programs~which may be the art that draws most users see Ferguson, 1999) and
has the most promotional valu fr stations. Finally, his paper will examine the degree to which
internet promotion of programs is akin to traditional print and on-air promotion of shows, and in
‘what ways is it similar and dissimilar. This study should ly a foundation for subsequent research
and prove @snopsot of how stations 1999 are adapting mukimedia to an old-fashioned
‘one-to-many mode! of media communication, at least in terms of marking and promotion. The
per will conclude wih a discussion ofthe issues and methodological problems ahead in
scholarly research into online program promotion with the goat of encouraging more disinterested
academie research in this area,
A review of previous fading
‘The orignal tues a far riche in detail than outlined below, bt the summary
information presented here is tallored to the questions sought by the present study, Even so,Program Promotion ote nee,
interesting ose findings ar als reported in many cases.
[As Table I shows, page length s getting shorter and the use of mile fames is
dectning. Simplification of we sitesi addressing the nec ofthe user. At the same ime,
‘websites are growing only slightly in sheer size, Bates and King (1996) found an average S4
pages pr sit; the present study using 1999 data uncovered 56 pages pr sit.
With regard to numberof screens, comparisons ae dificuk. Bates and King (1996)
‘reported a mean anda mode but not an average Fortunately, a subsequent analysis ofthe same
«ta (MeChun, 1997 filed inthe average. Also, the browser stings affect the number of
screens displayed on asite with vertical seroling content
“Table 2 summarizes the use of photographs and inked item in past and present research
Both suds by Bates use subcategories (eg, smal photo, medium phot, large photo) that defy
tirect comparisons, but the trend is toward more photographs. This coincides with eetive
promotional practice: Display advertisements with photographs attract more atenion. Faster
servers and computer connections wil fate greater use of photographic elements inthe
future.
“The use of matipe links seems to have peaked in 1997, Nowadays station sts strive to
simplily the promotiorl message. Researchers have noted that esi more” with egard to we
page design Eastman, 1999). Liming the length of sroling pages and esting back on text as
proven tobe an effective way'of creating an uncluttered web site.
Table 3 summarizes the use of movement on web pages. The data show a strong trend
toward increased animation and video. The simple eye-catching device of blinking text is anProgram Promotion en he Internet. 7
cflectve technique, fmt overused. Although the present study gave wide interpretation to the
definition oF blinking and animation, i imited the concept of video (counted as ether archived or
realtime in previous studies) strictly to realtime streaming. Even so, four out of fie sites inthe
1999 study took advantage of browser features (c.g, RealVideo) that allow streaming video,
Table 4 reports the percentage of pages (or stations) that use interactive communication
‘with the audience. The reporting inthe two different studies by Bates uses each page asthe unit
of analysis to one shoul! lake care making comparisons. Even so, getting feedback from the
viewers and listeners iserucal tothe promotional effort ~ and it is changing the way broadcasters
conceive their programming service to audiences. With interactivity, stations ean tailor thei
‘messages, including these that promote programs. As shown in Table 4, e-mail remains the most
simple form of two-way communication, but newer forms of real-time interactivity (€-., chat
rooms) are becoming more popular by the end ofthe decade,
‘Table 5 summatizes the paucity of data on the use of particular sources of promotion:
local, syndicated and netonal, Previous research did collet information on the use of program
schedules and station logos, but none ofthe studies counted the instances of loeal program.
promotion, The 1999 cata used in the present study suggest that local promotion is quite
prevalent (probably not much different from earlier). As network sites become more
sophisticated, stations are more likely to link to (or even be subsumed by) the national effort.
Until 1998, ABC aliiaes in particular had no network-originated umbrella service like
NBC.com. NBC was a early adopter of web sites and continues a high level of sophistication.
CBS and Fox were quick to follow, and the WE site as strongly challenged the big networksProgam Promo onthe eee, 8
while easily outperforming the UPN and Pax pages. lof the Big-3 networks were busy nthe
late-19905 acquiring ines services and becoming web portals (.., ABCs go.com and NBC's
snap.com).
It should not be assumed that all ofthe “network
stations exploiting the itera are from
commercial broadcasts, but most of them are. The 1999 data show that he our of four
stations tout thee networks’ progr, while the figures broken out for PBS stations show that
only aboot half (48.5 percent) promote shows from the network, (Further detail on which shows
are promoted is presened below inthe Results section of the present study:)
Method
[Asystemstie random sample was used for the present study, conducted in February and
March 1999, ‘The sarin fame was a complete Ist of ll U.S. television stations, including
translator fequencies, The list came ftom the FCC web ste (soww.ee-org) as binary file
representing an Excel spreadsheet of station Gequency assignments for digital tslevsion (HDTV),
Ever fit sting was marked from a random stating point and a stmmple of 291 stations was
generated, of which 179 had websites. Coders were reruite from a class of 33 senior-level
students fia with broadcasting research, with each student examining the web ites for upto
ten stations
“The original FCC database sted only the channe! number and the city of icense
Stations were located sing http: ultimate com and hit: /www.tradio.com web sites
Another ste (httpi/wmww.tvfind.com) was very useful after data collection for eoding the callProgram Promotion on the tert, 9
letters and network afiation of stations without web sites,
‘Table 6 summarizes the representation of websites by network afiation, Some ofthe
differences can be explined by sampling methods, but the general tend is that the website shares
approximate the networks’ audience shares. This finding isnot likely to endure inthe future,
‘when station websites become less peripheral to the promotional effort and more central to the
distribution of station content.
Unlike many previous studies that designated the page as the unit of analysis, this study
followed the example cf Rosales and Pits (1997), using the entire web site foreach station, Data
‘were collected by station and entered first into a spreadsheet to preserve qualitative information
The final step was to collapse information into raw counts and categories for analysis by SPSS.
Some variables used in previous studies (eg, advertising and news content) were not
collected, in order to ecus on program promotion. Other variables, such as selling merchandise
(used only by Rosales & Pitts) and conducting contests, were added to better understand the
kinds of promotional activities that have become popular since the earlier studies were conducted.
Intercoder reliability was measured using a double-coded subsample of 30 sites, following
the technique outlined by Bucy et al. (1998). The average reliability across all items coded was,
79, similar to previous stuies.
Results
Many of the descriptive statistics for the 1999 data have already been presented above in
the review of fterature, by way of comparison. This section begins by addressing the additionalProgram Promotion onthe Inert, 10
‘variables that were not commonly (or consistently) studied in earlier research. It also examines in
greater depth (see Table 7) the information reported in Table 5. Next, a summary of statistical
information is given for uncolapsed categorical daa. Fialy, «qualitative look atthe rich detail
provided by some (but not al of the coder is presented.
“Table 7 demonstrates that nearly ll alates focus on local programming. Only in the
case ofthe WB, whoseafiiats are the fith or sixth tations inthe marke, can one find less than
total commitment to lsal programs, Syadicaton is another story entirely. Fox flies,
‘raditionally the older “infependent” stations in each market, are more likely to promote irst-run
‘and offnetwork programs. NBC affiliates, often the earliest in their respective markets to have @
strong web presence, ae les likely to promote thee syncted shows. With regard to promotion
cof network shows, the sx station in the 1999 sample showed total commitment, owing largely t0
the situation where the WB primetime shows are often the best fre available on WB afiites.
“Table 8 summarizes the ndings on merchandising and contesting. One-ourth of at
stations are pushing the envelope of standard baner-and-lstng rogram promotion. Commercial
tiecins, cross promotion and contests have been use for years by promotion managers, and nov
the web sites are starting to show the taonal methods ina new venue
“Table 9 ists the stylistic web page variables by their mean, staxlard deviations and
ranges, For example, the use of photographs averages 253 pe station site, but the skewed
diseiution pts the median at only 12 photos to account forthe outers with hundreds of
photographs and the many more sites that use graphics rather than real pictures.Program Promin om he inter, 1
‘Qualitative findings
(One problem with quantitative content analyst
hat it reduces rich data to raw numbers.
Counts and categories are great for comparisons (and preferable for testing hypotheses) but
ineffective at getting a complete descriptive picture. For example, the finding that nearly all
stations promote loeal programs does not speak to the range of activity. In the 1999 data, the
kinds of promotion ran the gamut from (inthe optional words of the coders) "yes; plenty” to "yes;
very litle.” Rather than further categorize such descriptions it should be noted that there were
three common threads of local shows being promoted: local news (eg, News 10, WB20 News),
‘area team sports, and weather, The promotion ofan oecasional local talk show or public affairs
‘rogram proved to be exceptions rather than the rule
‘As noted earlier, there were fewer instances of syndicated and network promos. The four
‘most-commonly-cited syndicated shows were Home Improvement, Oprah, Ricki Lake, and Jerry
‘Springer. The four most-commonly-cited network shows were ABC Workl News Tonight,
‘Conan O'Brien, Jay Levo, and JAG.
Although no qualitative data were collected for stylistic web page elements, the kinds of
spectalized web techniques (c., steaming video, interactive feedhack, and contests) were coded,
Inthe instance of streaming video, the following types of content were identified: audio feeds,
skycam views, news stores local radar sereens, sports, promos, and movie reviews. Stations that
run online contests used the same trivia question or sweepstakes approach used on-air, with the
usual prizes ranging from trips (e-.,to Las Vegas) to concert and sporting event tickets. Two
stations exploited the graphic/textual nature of web pages to offer erosswordstype puzzles.Progam Prot nthe ne 12
Merchandise offers ranged fiom programetelated items (T-shirts, bllaps, souvenirs
videos) to flowers, magazines, and advertising coupons. Other unusual offerings that defy
classification were fee lide shows, vial station tous, re Tv psychic readings, tax assistance,
instant pols, job boards recipes, games, and kids’ clubs, In some instances, the station stepped
out ofthe realm of broaleast content entirely, to take fll advantage ofa diferent type of
medium, For example advertising banners and product ie-ns were pitched to local merchants 28
business opportunites,
Discussion of findings
“Although the tabulations of the content analysis are useful in eomparing previous findings,
the qualitative data are equally suited to a discussion ofthe depree to which intemet promotion of
programs is akin to trational print and on-air promotion of shows, and in what ways is it similar
and dissimilar, ‘This section draws on common practice among broedcasters offline withthe goal
‘of portraying the rol of internet promotion in the lager scheme.
‘One ofthe main dissimilarities (and a clear benefit) of web-based promotion is the eady
availability of fee space. On-air promotion has atime-scarcity value and is frequently bumped by
paid commercial messages, with the exception of ixed-positon promotion (Ferguson & Moses,
1999), Display space in newspapers, on outdoor billboards, and on the radio is not free ether
‘On-air and print promos conserve scarce resources by grouping program promos into
rnuliple spots, a seldom-used practice on the web where space is always plentifl and promotion
is usually ixed-positcn, One problem i thatthe chronology of a program schedule is notProgram Promotion othe nent 13
reinforced by the use of stand-alone promotional messages. Another drawback of this
dissimilarity is that good rotation of promotional messages is not maintained on websites, often
‘because updating of orline material is nota strong priority when compared to Keeping on-air
‘promos current. Until he number of people who are regularly exposed to web promotion
approaches parity with on-air and print promotion, attention to online promos will not be 2 high
priority
‘Another dissimilarity is the widespread use of generic promotion online as compared to
the use of specific promos on-eir, Eastman (1999) identifies 16 design guidelines, one of which
reads “Use specifies more often than generis for programs” (p. $3). Clearly, web promotion
should use more specifies, but is unlikely to do so until stations see the need to have better
rotation of messages,
Perhaps the grentest similarity between contemporary online promotion and conventional ofline
‘promotion is the way that message layout resembles outdoor advertising. Billboards along busy roads
neal to grab audience attention quickly and without much detail, Many online promos are designed
like billboards; even web advertising markets itselfas a “billboard” service because of the strong
similarities to outdoor advertising. Thus, the promotional strategy is creating or reinforcing awareness
‘through a simple listing, rather than persuading through a unique selling proposition (USB).
Another way to identify the similarities and dissimilarities is to examine the promotional
activities that foal television stations do “off-web" The amount of local news promotion online is
very similar to off ine promotion. Ferguson & Moses (1999) identify local news promotion as
key to the local effort: The web pages in tis study found loeal news quite prominent on a veryProgram romain ome ner
large number of local ses
Ferguson, Eastman, and Klein (1999) identify tne basic strategies for promotional
messages acquisitive, competitive, and retentive, Thats stations seek to acquire more audience,
take avay their compettors’ audience, and retain their loyal audience, The relative importance
iven by satons to these goals ate different according to the medium; for example, commercial
television is much more tied to acquisitive strategies than commercial radio stations, which focus
more on etentve strategies (Ferguson, Eastman, & Klein, 1999, p. 19). This present
examination of current practice (in 1999) of stations practicing web-based promotion suggests
that building loyalty (edentive strategies) most important, further indicating silty with the
radio model over the tdevsion model
In any cas, the identity that a web visitor ean associate witha specif tation sites more
inmporsant than the image the station project. Constantly reinventing the web interface and
tinkering with the page appearance may atually work against a strong web Ment.
Finely, web promotion and nonweb promotion are sila in ther attention othe use of
togos, wordmark, identifiers, and slogans, The main associate dissimilarity es inthe unity of
purpose, or ck thereof, A webpage offen tres to do everything atone tims rather than to one
thing a time and let the user choose a dretion, In this sense, the websites move ikea yellow
pages advertisement in that both pack as mach information together as possible because it may be
awhile before the messages are revised,rogram Prato nthe nr, 15
Conelasion
‘The data soomto demonstrate that the intemet is central eater than peripheral to the
station's promotional eft, In 1995 the station promotion director was content to think ofthe
internet asa medium tht was adtional to on-air and in-pin. In the nea Future, station
‘managers must consider that internet pages are of equal (or greater) importance to more
traitional venues for sation promotion. The key element is interactivity. The interet permits
the broadcast audience to “pull” information about a station, ather than the ld push model
Furthetmore asthe opening quotation to this paper suggests, the internet makes the old
networWlailate mode! less relevant and the idea ofa locally-oriented station more important.
‘To move to this point, stations must commit more resources to websites (Polon, 1999),
Station engineers must provide better servers and promotion stat must find better ways of
updating information. As the usbily of ste content improves, the possibilty of advertising and
‘merchandising provides the means to fund a deeper commitment to an online presence
Metholodological Issues
Future research must contend with the soletion of meaningful data. Some studies,
including this one, chose things to count merely because it could be easily counted. Enough
exploratory research hes been done fo stat testing some assumptions about web pages.
1 would soem advisable to move away’ from the focus on the page asa unit of analysis and
‘more toward the statioa itself; For one thing, the number of channels (and websites) is more likely
1 remain relatively slow-growing when compared to the number of web pages and lisks. KeepingProgam Proton he Inert 16
track of fewer variablesis more parsimonious.
Sampling remains an sue in content analysis and the study of websts ino diferent. No
perct sampling frame s posible with all the shared promotion on sister (trusltor) stations and
statewide publ television networks. Should two intial web sites fr two diferent FCC-ivensed
stations be counted wie (as was done fev ime inthis stay?
Greater use of cultatve information shouldbe generated. As this study demonstrated, i
canbe collected longsde the numerical data and eed to categorical datas necessary for
comparison, Whether or not it can generate usfil information about the tre dretons of internet
promotion emains an open question.rogram Potion on the ere 17
References
Bates, B. J, &King, RE (1996, Api). Television and the web: How lea television
broadcasters ae using the World Wide Web, Paper presented to the Broadcast uation
Assocation, Las Vegas
Bates, B. 1, Chambers LT, Embery, M, Jones, M., MeChung, 8. & Pak, J (1997,
August), Television onthe web, 1996: Local television stations” use ofthe World Wie Web.
Paper presented to the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication,
Chicago
Berthon, P., Leyland, F
.,& Watson, R. T. (1996). The World Wide Web as an
advertising medium, Journal of Advertsing Research, 36(1), 43-54,
Bucy, E.P., Lang, A., Potter, RF, & Grabe, M. F. (1998, August) Structural features
of eyberspace: A content analysis of the World Wide Web. Paper presented to the Association for
Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Baltimore,
DiNucei, D., with Giudice, M., & Stiles, L. (1997). Elements of web design. Berkeley,
CA: Peachpit Press
Eastman, S. T.(1999). Designing on-air, print and on-line promotion In S. T. Eastman,
D. A. Ferguson, & R. A. Klein (Eds), Promotion & marketing for broadcasting & cable, 3rd ed,
(pp. 29-53), Boston, MA: Focal Press,
Eastman, S.T., Ferguson, D. A., & Klein, RA. (1999), Promotion & matketing for
broadcasting & cabled e4.), Boston, MA: Focal Press
Ferguson, D. A, (1999). Network television promotion. la S. T, Eastman, D. A.Program Promotion the ere, 18
Ferguson, & R. A, Klein (Eds.), Promotion & marketing for broadcasting & cable, 3rd ed. (pp.
'89-96), Boston, MA: Focal Press
Ferguson, D. A, Eastman, $. ., & Klein, R. A, (1999). Marketing the media: Seope and
oals. In, T, Eastmas, D. A. Ferguson, & R.A. Klein (Eds), Promotion & marketing for
‘broadcasting & cable, rd ed. (pp. 1-28). Boston, MA: Focal Press
Ferguson, D. 4. & Moses, B, A. (1999). Local station television promotion. InS. T.
astman, D. A. Ferguion, & R.A. Klin (Bds.), Promotion & marketing for broadeasting &
sable, 3rd ed, (pp. 97-126). Boston, MA: Focal Press.
InteliQuest, www. inteliquest.com/presstelease78.asp
James, M. L., Wotring, C. E., & Forrest, E, J. (1995). Exploratory study of the perceived
benefits of electronic tulletin board use and their impact on other communication stivities,
journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 39, 30-50.
Kiernan, V., & Levy, M, (1999). Competition among broadeastrelated web sites, Journal
‘of Broadcasting & Eletronie Media, 43, 271-279.
King, A. B, (1997, December 31). What makes a great web site? [online paper
butp vow webreference con reatste bal
MeClung, S. R (1997, October). Information representation and local TY stations onthe
web: Building a better we ste, Paper presented tothe Ohio University Communications
Research Conference, Athens, OH.
Murphy, R (1998, Apri The value of radio station web sites. Paper presented to the
Broadcast Education Assocation, Las Vevas.Program Promaion nh ent 19
Nickamnp, R (1996, August), Television station sites onthe World Wide Web. Paper
presented tothe Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Chicago
Niskamp, R (1997, August. Televison station web sites Interactivity in news stories,
Paper presented to the Association fr Ealuation in Journalism and Mass Communication,
Baltimore.
Poton, M. (1999, July 19). You are what your website says you are, online ate:
hnupsfvwTVBroadcast.comv99.7.16.7. he
Rank H, (1991), The pitch: A simple way to understand the base pater of persuasion in
auvertsing, Park Fore, IL: Counter-Propaganda Press.
Rosales, RG, & Pitts, G. (1997) A content analysis of US. Television tations" web
sites. Paper presented tthe Broadcast Education Association, Las Veg.
Wolf, S. (1997, September 29). NBC and the net: The honeymoons over. Media Cental
Digest (apf: enlven com)
‘ww promolounge.comable | Number of sereens per website and percentage wit
Tuy DATA PAGE with |n
YEAR LENGTH _ | FRAMES:
Bates and King 1995 Bae NA 6
Bates, Chambers, et a 1996 261 NA 416
Bucy, Lang, et a 24 (mean) | 79.4 496
MeClung (using Bates data) | 1995 34 NA 0
Ferguson 1999 NA 24 7
*according to MeClung
(1995) N:Table? Percentage of pages with photographs and linked items
sTupy DATA| PHOTOS | LINKS ®
YEAR
Bates and King 1995 | 13.8 (medium) | 46.7 6
Bates, Chambers, et a 1996 | 3.8 ou 416
Bucy, Lang, et al 1997 | 31.9 ors. 496
Ferguson (% of stations) | 1999 | 86.0 804 179
* more than $
‘Table3 Percentage of pages with blinking, animation and full motion video
STUDY para | BLINKING | ANIMATION | viDEO. |
YEAR
Bates and King 199s | NA NA 02 a
Bates, Chambers, et. | 1996 | NA 205 69 416
Bucy, Lang, et a 1997 07 ng NA 496
Ferguson (% of tations) | 1999 | 29.4 559 369 19
1Table Percentage of pages with e-mail feedback and other interaction
] OTHER
sTubY Data YEAR] E-MAIL 2
Bates and King 1995 23 01 61
Bates, Chambers, et 1996 304 1s 401
Roses & Pits 1996 979 NA a7
‘Bucy, Lang, ea. 1997 94 ‘9.7 (hat) | 496
Ferguson (% of satens) | 1999 ont 9s 7Table S Percentage of pages with promotion (local, syndicated, network)
STUDY DATA | LOCAL | SYNDICATED | NETWORK | n
YEAR
Bates and King* 1995 | Na NA NA 6
Bates, Chambers, eta 1996 | Na. 10 462 403
Buey, Lang, etal. 1997 [wa [Na NA 496
Ferguson (% of stations) — | 1999 Joss | 57.3 eo. 178
°37.% of pages were “Big
“promotional” Alilistes
4.6% 126Table6 Website by Network afiition
Data Year | apc [cas [Nac [Fox] ws] urn | pax | pas | mpy | 2
patesss [267 [229 [164 |49 16 213
patews [155 [167 |207 | 106 ]21 [as nis [ao [102
Nickamp96 [235 | 284 [252 | 146 [24 [a1 none | 16
Roses [213 [iso ]aae [oa [43 [aa pone | 2.1
Roskeo7 [178 [205 |212 [90 |26 | 38 none [75 [18
Feuoo9 [182 [11 ]i72 fro3 [ai faa fiz fass]so [oo
‘addendum
10 1996 =Table7 Cross tsbulation of promos by network afiliation and promo source
1999 daa |e oeal %Syndcaion | Newark
Bc 36 | 1000 583 out
cas 30 | 962 on 742
Nac 44 | 1000 323 a8
Fox 15 | 1000 800 67
UPN 3 1000 1000 663
we 6 [a3 663 1000
as x2 [969 368 485
Table Percentage of statins with merchandising and contesting
sTupy aia YEAR| MERCHANDISE | CONTESIS | n
Rosle Pits | 1996 470 NA a
[Ferguson wo ana 270 m7‘Table9 Statistical summary of stylistic elements
‘Mean | Mode | Median [S.D. | Minimum | Maximum | n
Sersen Count ca ee las | aso 178
Frames anos ses [o ae fs
Photos rsa fo 12 [36s fo mime
Paragraphs 133 Jo [so [iss6 fo os ts
Bulkt poins (inks) [654 fo [16 fis Jo ws |i
Streaming video [59 |o [0 176 [a no [179