Abstract
Intermedia battles for advertising dollars are waged on the assumption that mass media are interchangeable in media schedules. However, there are both practical and empirical reasons to suspect that media are not seen as completely interchangeable by advertising experts. This study utilized survey and interviewing methods to examine top-level advertising managers' opinions of the substitutability of seven media options within the context of national advertising planning. Examination of the media substitutability assumption among these experts provides a buyer-side (demand) perspective called for in the literature. Contrary to expectations of little, if any, perceived substitutability among the media options, a degree of interchangeability was found. When the question of substitution arises in national advertising media planning, it would appear national advertising managers put traditional media in certain perceptual boxes. For example, cable TV was considered replaceable with broadcast TV and magazines with newspapers. Radio was perceived as a reasonable replacement not only for TV, but also for newspapers and billboards as well. Cable TV was judged an acceptable substitute for broadcast TV, radio, and magazines whereas newspapers were seen as a reasonable substitute for magazines and radio. Practical and research implications of the results are discussed.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.