Dissertation Details
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
THE IMPACT OF FREE NEWSPAPERS ON US MARKETS _______________________________________ A Dissertation presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School at the University of Missouri-Columbia _______________________________________________________ In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy _____________________________________________________ by KAREN HOFF Dr. Esther Thorson, Dissertation Supervisor JULY 2012 The undersigned, appointed by the dean of the Graduate School, have examined the dissertation entitled THE IMPACT OF FREE NEWSPAPERS ON US MARKETS presented by Karen Hoff, a candidate for the degree of doctor of philosophy, and hereby certify that, in their opinion, it is worthy of acceptance. Professor Esther Thorson Professor Margaret Duffy Professor Glenn Leshner Professor Kennon Sheldon Professor Tim Vos This dissertation is dedicated to my parents, Kathy and Richard Boyajy, my in- laws Ellen and Rob Hoff, and my loving husband Brian. Thank you for all your support and encouragement throughout this process. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank the members of the dissertation committee, Dr. Esther Thorson, Dr. Margaret Duffy, Dr. Glenn Leshner, Dr. Kennon Sheldon and Dr. Tim Vos. I would also like to thank Dr. Wayne Wanta, now at the University of Florida, who served on the committee when I defended my dissertation proposal. I want to thank Dr. Thorson for her roles as both my Dissertation Chair and Advisor. I appreciate the feedback Dr. Thorson provided on the proposal and dissertation, as well as her patience as the dissertation took much longer than planned. Her efforts throughout this process are greatly appreciated! Also wanted to thank Jim Smith of Morris Communications for the insight he provided on how to study free newspapers. I particularly appreciate his help in obtaining data for the study. Thank you to Gary Meo of Scarborough Research for providing the newspaper readership data, and for the time he took to review the readership analysis. I would also like to thank Dr. Steve Lacy, Michigan State University, for his insight on how to conceptualize the research and for providing a list of resources. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................ ii LIST OF TABLES ...............................................................................................................v ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................... viii Chapter 1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................1 2. NEWSPAPERS AND MEDIA CONSUMPTION: AN OVERVIEW .....................4 Newspaper Industry Conditions Media Consumption Newspapers’ Sources of Revenue – Advertising and Circulation Paid Newspapers’ Readership Paid Newspapers’ Circulation 3. FREE NEWSPAPERS OVERVIEW…………………………………………….14 4. THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK……………………………………………….21 Substitutability Media Complementarity Theory Hypotheses 5. METHODS OVERVIEW…………………………………………….…………24 6. METHODS AND RESULTS: READERSHIP ANALYSIS…………………....33 7. METHODS AND RESULTS: CIRCULATION ANALYSIS………………….77 8. METHODS AND RESULTS: MODIFIED CONTENT ANALYSIS…………113 9. DISCUSSION………………………………………………………..…………125 iii 10. CONCLUSION………………………………………………………..………. 129 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................131 VITA ................................................................................................................................138 iv LIST OF TABLES Table Page 5.1. Free and Paid Newspapers – Experimental and Control Markets………………………….26 5.2. Characteristics of cities within DMA Markets……………………………………………..29 6.1. Adults' Ave Wkdy Readership Comparison 2000–2007, Baltimore and Nashville Markets ....................................................................................... 37 6.2. 5-day Cumulative Audience Comparison 2000–2007, Baltimore and Nashville Experimental Markets ................................................................ 38 6.3. Adults’ Ave Wkdy Readership Comparison 2000–2007, Philadelphia and Dallas - Fort Worth Markets ................................................................... 41 6.4. 5-day Cumulative Audience Comparison 2000–2007, Philadelphia and Dallas - Fort Worth Markets ................................................................... 42 6.5. Adults’ Ave Wkdy Readership Comparison 2000–2007, Tampa - St. Petersburg and San Diego Markets ................................................................. 45 6.6. 5-day Cumulative Audience Comparison 2000–2007, Tampa - St. Petersburg and San Diego Markets ................................................................ 46 6.7. Adults’ Ave Wkdy Readership Comparison 2000–2007, Pittsburgh Experimental Market .................................................................................... 48 6.8. 5-day Cumulative Audience Comparison 2000–2007, Pittsburgh Experimental Market ......................................................................................... 49 6.9. Summary of Average Weekday Readership Comparisons - Percent Changes and Confidence Intervals ............................................................................................................ 50 6.10. Summary of 5-day Cumulative Audience Comparisons – Percent Changes and Confidence Intervals .................................................................................................... 51 6.11. Demographics - % Adults’ Average Weekday Readership, Nashville Market ................................................................................................................ 55 6.12. Demographics - % 5-day Cumulative Audience, Nashville Market ................................................................................................................ 57 6.13. Demographics - % Adults' Average Weekday Readership, Philadelphia Market............................................................................................................ 64 6.14. Demographics - % 5-day Cumulative Audience, Philadelphia Market............................................................................................................ 66 v 6.15. Demographics - % Adults' Ave Wkdy Readership, Dallas – Fort Worth Market ............................................................................................... 72 6.16. Demographics - % 5-day Cumulative Audience, Dallas – Fort Worth Market ............................................................................................... 73 6.17. Demographics - % Adults' Ave Wkdy Rdrship & % 5-day Cumulative Audience, Tampa - St. Petersburg Mrkt .............................................................................................. 76 7.1. Total Single Copy Circulation Comparison, Baltimore, Nashville and Norfolk Exp Markets ................................................................... 80 7.2. Total Single Copy Circulation Comparison, Philadelphia Experimental Market ....................................................................................... 82 7.3. Total Single Copy Circulation Comparison, Dallas and Tampa – St. Petersburg Exp Markets ................................................................ 85 7.4. Total Single Copy Circulation Comparison, San Diego Experimental Market ......................................................................................... 87 7.5. Total Single Copy Circulation Comparison, Pittsburgh and Savannah Experimental Markets ................................................................ 89 7.6. Total Single Copy Circulation Comparison, Grand Junction Experimental Market ................................................................................. 91 7.7. Summary of Single Copy Sales – Percent Changes and Confidence Intervals ................... 92 7.8. Total Paid Circulation Comparison, Baltimore, Nashville and Norfolk Experimental Markets .................................................. 95 7.9. Total Paid Circulation Comparison, Philadelphia Experimental Market ......................98 7.10. Total Paid Circulation Comparison, Dallas – Fort Worth and Tampa – St. Petersburg Exp Markets ...................................... 101 7.11. Total Paid Circulation Comparison, San Diego Experimental Market ..................................................................................... 104 7.12. Total Paid Circulation Comparison, Pittsburgh and Savannah Experimental Markets ............................................................ 107 7.13. Total Paid Circulation Comparison, Grand Junction Experimental Market………………………………………………….109 7.14. Summary of Total Paid Circulation – Percent Changes and Confidence Intervals…….111 vi 8.1. Free Newspaper Characteristics – Page Numbers and Entertainment Front Page Coverage……………………………………………………117 8.2. Free Newspapers Characteristics – Tone, Front Page Coverage, Number of Pages and Advertising Content…………………..……………………………………………124 vii THE IMPACT OF FREE NEWSPAPERS ON U.S. MARKETS Karen Hoff Dr. Esther Thorson, Dissertation Supervisor ABSTRACT This study looks at free newspapers, focusing on the modern era beginning in 1995, to better understand the impact these publications have on paid newspapers. The theory revolves around the question of media substitutability, that is, is there evidence that free newspapers substitute for paid ones? This is tested with