Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

This study examined the effects of news use motivations and differing native advertising contexts (hard vs. soft news) on the ability to perceive commercialized content, evaluations of native advertising, and ensuing digital news perceptions. Based upon the framework of the persuasion knowledge model, an online experiment was conducted among a sample of U.S. adults (N = 684). Engaging with news for informational motivations conditioned perceptions of advertising as did the contextual effects of hard versus soft news. Furthermore, hard-news approaches to native advertising were perceived more unfavorably by audiences and tarnished the subsequent reporting of actual journalists.

Keywords

digital news experiment native advertising persuasion

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abramson

(2019, January 21). Difficult news: Lessons in journalism—And management—From editing the New York Times during the great digital disruption. New York Magazine. Retrieved from http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/01/jill-abramson-merchants-of-truth-book-excerpt.html#comments

Amazeen

M. A.

Bucy

E. P.

(2019). Conferring resistance to digital disinformation: The inoculating influence of procedural news knowledge. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 63, 415-432.

Amazeen

M. A.

Muddiman

A. R.

(2018). Saving media or trading on trust? The effects of native advertising on audience perceptions of legacy and online news publishers. Digital Journalism, 6, 176-195. doi:10.1080/21670811.2017.1293488

Amazeen

M. A.

Thorson

Muddiman

Graves

(2018). Correcting political and consumer misperceptions: The effectiveness and effects of rating scale versus contextual correction formats. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 95, 28-48.

Amazeen

M. A.

Wojdynski

B. W.

(2018). The effects of disclosure format on native advertising recognition and audience perceptions of legacy and online news publishers. Journalism. Advance online publication. doi:10.1177/1464884918754829

Amazeen

M. A.

Wojdynski

B. W.

(2019). Reducing native advertising deception: Revisiting the antecedents and consequences of persuasion knowledge in digital news contexts. Mass Communication and Society, 22, 222-247. doi:10.1080/15205436.2018.1530792

Aston

(n.d.). A complex flow of energy. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://paidpost.nytimes.com/chevron/a-complex-flow-of-energy.html#.WvyVWsgh3y-

Bagdikian

B. H

. (2004). The new media monopoly. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.

Baum

M. A.

(2003). Soft news and political knowledge: Evidence of absence or absence of evidence? Political Communication, 20, 172-190.

10.

Baum

M. A.

(2006). Hard and soft news. In Schaefer

T. M.

Birkland

T. A.

(Eds.), Encyclopedia of media and politics (pp. 106-107). Washington, DC: Congressional Quarterly Press.

11.

Beckert

Koch

Viererbl

Denner

Peter

(in press). Advertising in disguise? How disclosure and content features influence the effects of native advertising. Communications: The European Journal of Communication Research.

12.

Berinsky

A. J.

Huber

G. A.

Lenz

G. S.

(2012). Evaluating online labor markets for experimental research: Amazon.com’s Mechanical Turk. Political Analysis, 20, 351-368. doi:10.1093/pan/mpr057

13.

Blumler

J. G.

(1979). The role of theory in uses and gratifications studies. Communication Research, 6, 9-36.

14.

Boerman

S. C.

van Reijmersdal

E. A.

Neijens

P. C.

(2012). Sponsorship disclosure: Effects of duration on persuasion knowledge and brand responses. Journal of Communication, 62, 1047-1064. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01677.x

15.

Boerman

S. C.

Willemsen

L. M.

Van Der Aa

E. P.

(2017). “This post is sponsored”: Effects of sponsorship disclosure on persuasion knowledge and electronic word of mouth in the context of Facebook. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 38, 82-92. doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2016.12.002

16.

Boukes

Boomgaarden

H. G.

(2015). Soft news with hard consequences? Introducing a nuanced measure of soft versus hard news exposure and its relationship with political cynicism. Communication Research, 42, 701-731.

17.

Campbell

M. C.

Kirmani

(2008). I know what you’re doing and why you’re doing it: The use of the persuasion knowledge model in consumer research. In Haugtvedt

C. P.

Herr

P. M.

Kardes

F. R.

(Eds.), The handbook of consumer psychology (pp. 549-573). New York, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.

18.

Carlson

(2015). When news sites go native: Redefining the advertising-editorial divide in response to native advertising. Journalism, 16, 849-865.

19.

Carroll

(2019, January 24). Reuters article highlights ethical issues with native advertising. Columbia Journalism Review. Retrieved from https://www.cjr.org/watchdog/reuters-article-thai-fishing-sponsored-content.php

20.

Chaiken

(1980). Heuristic versus systematic information processing and the use of source versus message cues in persuasion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 752-766.

21.

Choi

(2016). Why do people use news differently on SNSs? An investigation of the role of motivations, media repertoires, and technology cluster on citizens’ news-related activities. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 249-256.

22.

Curran

Iyengar

Lund

A. B.

Salovaara-Moring

(2009). Media system, public knowledge and democracy. European Journal of Communication, 24, 5-26.

23.

Cusick

Boros

(2018, February 8). The secrets of “Black Ops” advertising. Who is paying for our news? openDemocracy. Retrieved from https://www.opendemocracy.net/james-cusick-crina-boros/blurred-lines-and-black-ops-disappearing-divide-between-uk-news-and-adverti

24.

Darke

P. R.

Ashworth

Ritchie

R. J. B.

(2008). Damage from corrective advertising: Causes and cures. Journal of Marketing, 72, 81-97. doi:10.1509/jmkg.72.6.81

25.

De Pelsmacker

Geuens

Anckaert

(2002). Media context and advertising effectiveness: The role of context appreciation and context/ad similarity. Journal of Advertising, 31, 49-61.

26.

Edgerly

Vraga

E. K.

(2019). News, entertainment, or both? Exploring audience perceptions of media genre in a hybrid media environment. Journalism, 20, 807-826. doi:10.1177/1464884917730709

27.

Einstein

(2016). Black ops advertising: Native ads, content marketing, and the covert world of the digital sell. New York, NY: OR Books.

28.

Elliott

M. T.

Speck

P. S.

(1998). Consumer perceptions of advertising clutter and its impact across various media. Journal of Advertising Research, 38, 29-41.

29.

Eveland

W. P.

Jr. Shah

D. V.

Kwak

(2003). Assessing causality in the cognitive mediation model: A panel study of motivations, information processing, and learning during campaign 2000. Communication Research, 30, 359-386. doi:10.1177/0093650203253369

30.

Farley

(2008, December 3). No, McCain’s ads haven’t all been negative. PolitiFact. Retrieved from http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/dec/03/barack-obama/no-mccains-ads-havent-all-been-negative/

31.

Federal Trade Commission. (2015). Native advertising: A guide for businesses. Retrieved from https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/native-advertising-guide-businesses

32.

Feldman

(2013). Learning about politics from The Daily Show: The role of viewer orientation and processing motivations. Mass Communication and Society, 16, 586-607.

33.

Ferrer Conill

(2016). Camouflaging church as state: An exploratory study of journalism’s native advertising. Journalism Studies, 17, 904-914.

34.

Fogg

B. J.

Kameda

Boyd

Marshall

Sethi

Sockol

Trowbridge

(2002). Stanford-Makovsky web credibility study 2002: Investigating what makes web sites credible today (A Research Report by the Stanford Persuasive Technology Lab & Makovsky & Company). Stanford University. Retrieved from http://credibility.stanford.edu/pdf/Stanford-MakovskyWebCredStudy2002-prelim.pdf

35.

Friestad

Wright

(1994). The persuasion knowledge model: How people cope with persuasion attempts. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 1-31.

36.

Gerth

(2017, June 28). In the digital age, The New York Times treads an increasingly slippery path between news and advertising. Columbia Journalism Review. Retrieved from https://www.cjr.org/special_report/digital-age-the-new-york-times-slippery-path-news-advertising.php

37.

Greszki

Meyer

Schoen

(2015). Exploring the effects of removing “too fast” responses and respondents from web surveys. Public Opinion Quarterly, 79, 471-503.

38.

(1996). Advertising clutter in consumer magazines: Dimensions and effects. Journal of Advertising Research, 36, 76-84.

39.

McCann

(2008). An integrated model of advertising clutter in offline and online media. International Journal of Advertising, 27, 569-592.

40.

Hayes

A. F.

(2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

41.

Howe

Teufel

(2014). Native advertising and digital natives: The effects of age and advertisement format on news website credibility judgments. ISOJ Journal, 4, 78-90.

42.

Iversen

M. H.

Knudsen

(2019). When politicians go native: The consequences of political native advertising for citizens’ trust in news. Journalism, 20, 961-978. doi:10.1177/1464884916688289

43.

Katz

Haas

Gurevitch

(1973). On the use of the mass media for important things. American Sociological Review, 38, 164-181.

44.

Kees

Berry

Burton

Sheehan

(2017). An analysis of data quality: Professional panels, student subject pools, and Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. Journal of Advertising, 46, 141-155.

45.

Kovach

Rosenstiel

(2001). The elements of journalism: What newspeople should know and the public should expect. New York, NY: Crown Publishers.

46.

Krouwer

Poels

Paulussen

(2017). To disguise or to disclose? The influence of disclosure recognition and brand presence on readers’ responses toward native advertisements in online news media. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 17, 124-137.

47.

Lehman-Wilzig

S. N.

Seletzky

(2010). Hard news, soft news, “general” news: The necessity and utility of an intermediate classification. Journalism, 11, 37-56.

48.

Levi

(2015). A Faustian pact? Native advertising and the future of the press. Arizona Law Review, 57, 647-713.

49.

(2019). Contest over authority: Negotiating native advertising’s impacts on journalism autonomy. Journalism Studies, 20, 523-541.

50.

Litman

Robinson

Abberbock

(2017). TurkPrime.com: A versatile crowdsourcing data acquisition platform for the behavioral sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 49, 433-442. doi:10.3758/s13428-016-0727-z

51.

McGrew

Ortega

Breakstone

Wineburg

(2017). The challenge that’s bigger than fake news: Teaching students to engage in civic online reasoning. American Educator, 41, 4-39.

52.

Menictas

Wang

Fine

(2011). Assessing flat-lining response style bias in online research. Australasian Journal of Market & Social Research, 19, 34-44.

53.

Miller

Kurpius

(2010). A citizen-eye view of television news source credibility. American Behavioral Scientist, 54, 137-156.

54.

Moorman

Neijens

P. C.

Smit

E. G.

(2002). The effects of magazine-induced psychological responses and thematic congruence on memory and attitude toward the ad in a real-life setting. Journal of Advertising, 31, 27-40.

55.

Newman

Fletcher

Kalogeropoulos

Levy

D. A. L.

Nielsen

R. K.

(2018). Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2018. Oxford, UK: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.

56.

Newman

Fletcher

Levy

D. A. L.

Nielsen

R. K.

(2016). Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2016. Oxford, UK: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.

57.

Norris

C. E.

Colman

A. M.

(1992). Context effects on recall and recognition of magazine advertisements. Journal of Advertising, 21, 37-46.

58.

Otto

Glogger

Boukes

(2017). The softening of journalistic political communication: A comprehensive framework model of sensationalism, soft news, infotainment, and tabloidization. Communication Theory, 27, 136-155. doi:10.1111/comt.12102

59.

Palmgreen

Rayburn

J. D. I. I.

(1982). Gratifications sought and media exposure: An expectancy value model. Communication Research, 9, 561-580.

60.

Petty

R. E.

Cacioppo

J. T.

(1986). The elaboration likelihood model of persuasion. In Berkowitz

(Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 123-205). New York, NY: Academic Press.

61.

Powell

(2013, December 5). Native ads aren’t as clear as outlets think. Columbia Journalism Review. Retrieved from https://archives.cjr.org/behind_the_news/ftc_workshop_on_sponsored_cont.php

62.

Prior

(2003). Any good news in soft news? The impact of soft news preference on political knowledge. Political Communication, 20, 149-171.

63.

Reinemann

Stanyer

Scherr

Legnante

(2011). Hard and soft news: A review of concepts, operationalizations and key findings. Journalism, 13, 221-239.

64.

Rodgers

Thorson

(2000). The interactive advertising model: How users perceive and process online ads. Journal of Interactive Advertising, 1, 42-61.

65.

Rubin

A. M.

(1981). An examination of television viewing motivations. Communication Research, 8, 141-165.

66.

Rubin

A. M.

(1984). Ritualized and instrumental television viewing. Journal of Communication, 34, 67-77.

67.

Ruggiero

T. E.

(2000). Uses and gratifications theory in the 21st century. Mass Communication and Society, 3, 3-37. doi:10.1207/s15327825mcs0301_02

68.

Sheehan

K. B.

(2018). Crowdsourcing research: Data collection with Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. Communication Monographs, 85, 140-156. doi:10.1080/03637751.2017.1342043

69.

Smith

R. E.

Buchholz

L. M.

(1991). Multiple resource theory and consumer processing of broadcast advertisements: An involvement perspective. Journal of Advertising, 20(3), 1-7.

70.

Society of Professional Journalists. (2014). SPJ code of ethics. Retrieved from https://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp

71.

Sun

(2008). An examination of disposition, motivation, and involvement in the new technology context computers in human behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 2723-2740.

72.

T Brand Studio. (n.d.). Grit & grace. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://paidpost.nytimes.com/cole-haan/grit-and-grace.html

73.

Tuchman

(1973). Making news by doing work: Routinizing the unexpected. American Journal of Sociology, 79, 110-131.

74.

TurkPrime. (2018). After the bot scare: Understanding what’s been happening with data collection on MTurk and how to stop it. Retrieved from https://blog.turkprime.com/after-the-bot-scare-understanding-whats-been-happening-with-data-collection-on-mturk-and-how-to-stop-it

75.

Tutaj

van Reijmersdal

E. A.

(2012). Effects of online advertising format and persuasion knowledge on audience reactions. Journal of Marketing Communication, 18, 5-18.

76.

Van der Goot

M. J.

Zandbergen

Van Reijmersdal

E. A.

(2019, May). Sponsorship disclosures in online sponsored content: Practitioners’ considerations. Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the International Communication Association, Washington, DC.

77.

Victor

(2019, August 20). How to avoid the real fake news: The best way to combat wild conspiracy theories is through media literacy. Medium. Retrieved from https://gen.medium.com/how-to-avoid-the-real-fake-news-ec6145839ccc

78.

Vraga

E. K.

Tully

(2019). News literacy, social media behaviors, and skepticism toward information on social media. Information, Communication & Society. Advance online publication. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2019.1637445

79.

Wojdynski

B. W.

(2016). The deceptiveness of sponsored news articles: How readers recognize and perceive native advertising. American Behavioral Scientist, 60, 1475-1491.

80.

Wojdynski

B. W.

Evans

N. J.

(2016). Going native: Effects of disclosure position and language on the recognition and evaluation of online native advertising. Journal of Advertising, 45, 157-168.

81.

Wojdynski

B. W.

Evans

N. J.

(2019). The covert advertising recognition and effects (CARE) model: Processes of persuasion in native advertising and other masked formats. International Journal of Advertising. Advance online publication. doi:10.1080/02650487.2019.1658438

82.

Wood

Harms

P. D.

Lowman

G. H.

DeSimone

J. A.

(2017). Response speed and response consistency as mutually validating indicators of data quality in online samples. Social Psychological & Personality Science, 8, 454-464.

83.

Huang

Bortree

D. S.

Yang

Xiao

Wang

(2016). A tale of two sources in native advertising: Examining the effects of source credibility and priming on content, organizations, and media evaluations. American Behavioral Scientist, 60, 1492-1509.

84.

Zelizer

(2004). Taking journalism seriously: News and the academy. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

85.

Zha

H. D.

(2014). The impact of online disruptive ads on users’ comprehension, evaluation of site credibility, and sentiment of intrusiveness. American Communication Journal, 16, 15-28.

86.

Zhang

Conrad

F. G.

(2014). Speeding in web surveys: The tendency to answer very fast and its association with straightlining. Survey Research Methods, 8, 127-135.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.46 MB

News in an Era of Content Confusion: Effects of News Use Motivations and Context on Native Advertising and Digital News Perceptions

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References

Supplementary Material