Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login

Understanding the Internet's relevance to media ownership policy: a model of too many choices

Contents:

Author Info

  • Nagler, Matthew

Abstract

Does the Internet provide a failsafe against media consolidation in the wake of an easing of media ownership rules? This paper posits a model of news outlet selection on the Internet in which consumers experience cognitive costs that increase with the number of options faced. Consistent with psychological evidence, these costs may be reduced by constraining one’s choice set to “safe bets” familiar from offline (e.g., CNN.com). It is shown that, as the number of outlets grows, dispersion of consumer visitation across outlets inevitably declines. Consequently, independent Internet outlets may fail to mitigate lost outlet independence on other media.

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/2180/
File Function: original version
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 2180.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: 14 Dec 2006
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:2180

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Schackstr. 4, D-80539 Munich, Germany
Phone: +49-(0)89-2180-2219
Fax: +49-(0)89-2180-3900
Web page: http://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de
More information through EDIRC

Related research

Keywords: Choice framing; Media ownership; Internet; Differentiated products; Location models;

Other versions of this item:

Find related papers by JEL classification:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Esther Gal-Or & Anthony Dukes, 2003. "Minimum Differentiation in Commercial Media Markets," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(3), pages 291-325, 09.
  2. Kaiser Ulrich, 2006. "Magazines and their Companion Websites: Competing Outlet Channels?," Review of Marketing Science, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-26, August.
  3. Ulrich Kaiser & Hans Christian Kongsted, 2007. "Do Magazines' ”Companion Websites” Cannibalize the Demand for the Print Version?," CIE Discussion Papers 2007-03, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. Centre for Industrial Economics.
  4. Mark Armstrong, 2005. "Competition in Two-Sided Markets," Industrial Organization 0505009, EconWPA.
  5. Dhar, Ravi, 1997. " Consumer Preference for a No-Choice Option," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 24(2), pages 215-31, September.
  6. Gabszewicz, Jean J & Laussel, Didier & Sonnac, Nathalie, 2002. " Press Advertising and the Political Differentiation of Newspapers," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 4(3), pages 317-34.
  7. Simon P. Anderson & Stephen Coate, 2003. "Market Provision of Broadcasting: A Welfare Analysis," Virginia Economics Online Papers 358, University of Virginia, Department of Economics.
  8. Hauser, John R & Wernerfelt, Birger, 1990. " An Evaluation Cost Model of Consideration Sets," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 16(4), pages 393-408, March.
  9. GABSZEWICZ, Jean J. & LAUSSEL, Didier & SONNAC, Nathalie, . "Programming and advertising competition in the broadcasting industry," CORE Discussion Papers RP -1873, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
  10. Rochet, Jean-Charles & Tirole, Jean, 2003. "Platform Competition in Two-Sided Markets," IDEI Working Papers 152, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
  11. Steffen Hoernig & Tommaso Valletti, 2006. "Mixing Goods with Two-Part Tariffs," CEIS Research Paper 72, Tor Vergata University, CEIS.
  12. Grace, H Stephen, Jr, 1970. "Professor Samuelson on Free Enterprise and Economic Inefficiency: A Comment," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 84(2), pages 337-40, May.
  13. Anderson, S. & Neven, D.J., 1986. "Market efficiency with combinable products," CORE Discussion Papers 1986045, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
  14. Dos Santos Ferreira, R. & Thisse, J.-F., . "Horizontal and vertical differentiation: The Launhardt model," CORE Discussion Papers RP -1216, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
  15. Shugan, Steven M, 1980. " The Cost of Thinking," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 7(2), pages 99-111, Se.
  16. Richard Schmalensee, 1978. "Entry Deterrence in the Ready-to-Eat Breakfast Cereal Industry," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 9(2), pages 305-327, Autumn.
  17. Nagler, Matthew G., 1993. "Rather bait than switch : Deceptive advertising with bounded consumer rationality," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 51(3), pages 359-378, July.
  18. Steven C. Salop, 1979. "Monopolistic Competition with Outside Goods," Bell Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 10(1), pages 141-156, Spring.
  19. Steven T. Berry & Joel Waldfogel, 2001. "Do Mergers Increase Product Variety? Evidence From Radio Broadcasting," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 116(3), pages 1009-1025, August.
  20. Alexander Chernev, 2005. "Feature Complementarity and Assortment in Choice," Journal of Consumer Research, University of Chicago Press, vol. 31(4), pages 748-759, 03.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

Citations

Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
as in new window

Cited by:
  1. Jimmy Chan & Daniel Stone, 2013. "Media proliferation and partisan selective exposure," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 156(3), pages 467-490, September.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pra:mprapa:2180. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ekkehart Schlicht).

If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.

If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.