You are on page 1of 26
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 Orleans Program 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/, 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’ history Progr 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 an Program 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 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 networks Progam 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 and NBC's 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 ( 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: / web sites Another ste (httpi/ was very useful after data collection for eoding the call Program 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 additional Program 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 not Program 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 very Program 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. Keeping Progam 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. 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 able | 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 1 Table 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 7 Table 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% 126 Table6 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