FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACTS:     Nancy Bunn, 513-684-7509, nancy.bunn@burke.com

                        Cary Nadel, 203-431-5901, cary.nadel@burke.com

 

Burke ICE Research Conducts Whole-Brain Web Site Assessments

of CNN.com, FoxNews.com and MSNBC.com Web Sites

 

Cincinnati, Ohio (February 25, 2002) – A recent project on cable news Web sites sponsored by Burke ICE Research demonstrates the effectiveness of the whole-brain Web site assessments. These assessments are conducted in traditional focus group facilities using technology developed by Blue Bear™ LLC.

 

Burke ICE Research, a company practice area specializing in information communications and entertainment research, had participants in the study evaluate CNN.com, FoxNews.com and MSNBC.com during the two-hour session. Four men and four women participated in the session, which mixed qualitative and quantitative information gathering – and behavioral and attitudinal testing – to gather both left-brain data on site functionality and right-brain information on the sites’ emotional impact.

 

All participants were screened to ensure they spend one or more hours per week online from their homes and have home access to television cable channels. All were aged 31 to 54 with household incomes of $25,000 to $100,000.

 

Participants were first asked to comment on site home pages, then “free surf” through the site for seven minutes, adding verbatims comments into a proprietary browser as they surfed. After each free surf period, participants were directed to surveys that they completed online. Only after each site was evaluated in this way did group discussion begin. Consumers were also asked to complete online tasks to test the user-friendliness of sites.

 

CNN.com and FoxNews.com Preferred

 

Overall, CNN.com was the preferred Web site due to its professional and unbiased tonality. Most participants, however, admitted that FoxNews.com had succeeded in making news “entertaining,” although this caused some participants to believe it had given up some credibility as a result. The MSNBC.com site was least favored, mostly because it seemed to be attempting to strike a middle ground between CNN and Fox, and lacked a genuine identity.

 

These preferences were evident in the survey conducted following the free surf periods, but preceding any group discussion. (See Exhibit A.) Because only a single group was conducted, there is potentially an order bias in the results. The presentation order was CNN.com, FoxNews.com and then MSNBC.com.

 

Exhibit A

Order seen and rated

1

2

3

 

CNN.com

FoxNews.com

MSNBC.com

Overall Reaction

4.3

3.9

3.3

How important to me in future

4.3

4.0

3.1

Uniqueness Rating

3.6

3.5

3.1

Attribute Ratings:

 

 

 

Easy to read/understand

4.6

4.4

4.4

Clear overall purpose

4.6

4.4

4.1

Helpful or interesting information

4.3

4.6

4.0

Appealing look

4.6

4.1

3.9

Logical/Intuitive layout

4.3

4.3

3.8

Use of color, graphics, photos

4.8

3.5

3.8

Made me curious

4.3

4.4

3.6

Credible/trustworthy

4.6

4.1

3.5

Easy to find what looking for

4.6

4.6

3.5

Site gave off mood

4.0

3.3

2.9

 

A five-point scale was used, with “5” indicating “made we want to stay” and “1” indicating “made me want to leave.” Average scores of at least 4.5 are bolded. Attributes are ordered by average MSNBC.com rating.

 

Qualitative Discussion

 

In qualitative discussion following the survey, the following key points were made:

 

CNN.com was credited with being the no-nonsense news leader, but also exuding a sterile approach. Participants saw it as efficient, professional, and unbiased, and indicated it has a clear, simple organization; easy to find topics; and easy-to-remember navigation bars. Remarkably, participants were able to completely reconstruct by memory the left navigation bar – easily reciting in group discussion the specific buttons. They had a high level of comfort with the site; they indicated if they had the CNN CEO over for dinner, they would serve “meat and potatoes.” Participants thought the site image was perfectly consistent with that of the TV channel.

 

On the downside, CNN.com offered no “wow” factor to draw and keep users on the site. Additionally, CNN.com lacked personalities to liven up the site. When asked to describe CNN’s president, there was unanimous assent that he was male, and he was characterized as likely being a “business suit” and “formal, nondescript and cold.” Participants felt CNN.com could most improve its site by adding more interesting options, such as slide shows, articles, or feature articles by CNN on-air hosts and anchors.

 

Participants viewed FoxNews.com as a quirky upstart with an attitude – and also with a potential for biased reporting. They called FoxNews.com entertaining, exciting, full of personality, fun, and different. The Fox News executive was described as likely being trendy (but expensive) in dress, likely including a gray turtleneck or an open collar and jeans. The FoxNews CEO could be a woman, said participants, who said they would serve wine to the FoxNews CEO, but never to the CNN CEO. The home page was said to be more interesting than that of CNN.com because stories carried a sentence after the headline that provided a little more background on the story. The navigation bar had a mouse-over drop-down that created an impression of a great deal of detail.

 

While CNN.com was seen as a stand-alone Web site, most participants felt that the FoxNews.com site was advertising the Fox News TV channel. The pictures of on-air personalities and anchors created more of a promotional sense, but this was not seen as entirely bad. Most participants liked seeing the anchor and host personalities displayed and some indicated they would read the columns of their favorites. An interesting debate ensued about whether it was possible to have “personality” in a news site and not be biased. Most concluded that personality could co-mingle with unbiased reporting, but it wasn’t clear that FoxNews was truly seeking balance. One participant said, “this site is less credible, but more enjoyable than CNN.”

 

MSNBC.com has an unnatural, artificial presence that reflects a failed attempt to be hip. Participants indicated they had a “fuzzy” impression of MSNBC.com, saying it seemed like “CNN trying to act like Fox.” Despite several attempts, these participants simply could not come up with a description of the CEO of MSNBC.com. They believed that under the “flashier” graphic presentation it was just another CNN.com, but the approach taken to become more exciting was unsettling. Most didn’t feel the “in-between” approach worked.

 

Graphically, MSNBC.com’s layout seemed cluttered, unbalanced and unplanned. The left navigation bar’s drop-downs and the bottom of the site were considered too complex. The motion and movement on the site was also seen as offputting. Flashing ads, often placed in the middle of the site, were annoying to all participants and distracted from the site content. Participants also noted non-stop self-promotion and superfluous clicks that interrupted access to news stories. Specifically, when consumers clicked on a story, they disliked that they received only the first paragraph in larger type and perhaps a photo. Finally, the concept of chat during the news was considered gimmicky by these participants.

 

One thing about MSNBC.com that was applauded was that, during a time of intense interest in the September 11 attacks, this site included more news than just the attacks.

 

Rough Comparative Assessment

 

A rough quantitative assessment was also conducted during the group discussion. CNN.com and FoxNews.com consistently scored near the top, with MSNBC.com lagging behind (See Exhibit B).

 

Exhibit B

 

CNN.com

FoxNews.com

MSNBC.com

Overall

5-9

5-9

3-7

Navigation

8-9

8-9

6-8

Easy-to-find information

6

7-9

6

Content quality

8-10

6-10

5-9

Appealing to the eye

8-10

6-10

4-8

 

A ten-point scale was used, with “10” indicating “perfect.”

 

Task Performance

 

Participants were asked to accomplish three things on CNN.com and FoxNews.com (there was insufficient time to perform these tasks on MSNBC.com):

 

 

Seven out of eight participants completed the tasks. The average time on Fox News was 3.5 minutes (6.4 clicks), slightly less than the amount of time needed to complete the tasks on CNN.com (4.3 minutes; 7 clicks). For a detailed navigation map of a typical participant, please see Exhibit C.

 

Representative verbatim comments typed in about site home pages can also be seen in Exhibit D.

 

For further information on the whole-brain Web site assessment system, please contact:

Cary J. Nadel

                Vice President

                Burke ICE Research

                470 Main Street, Suite 304

                Ridgefield, CT 06877

                203-431-5901 Office

                203-431-5905 Fax

                203-470-8100 Mobile

                cary.nadel@burke.com
                www.burke.com

Exhibit D

 

Representative Verbatims About Home Page

CNN.com

(33 likes; 1 dislike, 0 frustrations, 0 questions)

FoxNews.com

(79 likes, 20 dislikes, 3 frustrations, 3 questions)

MSNBC.com

(23 likes, 2 dislikes, 0 frustrations, 0 questions)

Didn’t like that I was unable to view the video.

Needs more headlines and fewer graphics

I hate pop up ads like this one. It’s ok to include ads in the sidelines, but it’s a nuisance to have to close the pop up box. I would stop visiting this site if it happened very often.

Too busy.

Headlines don’t jump out as much to me as on CNN.

Nothing here but ads.

Would like news other than the attack on America.

Liked CNN Side bar better.

Dislike the flashing ads.

I like it because it tells the story and advises where to go for more information on the topic.

Seems about the same as other news sites.

You get what you want but it takes a lot longer, too many commercials and slower than others

Easy read

I don’t like, dark, hard for me to read.

Like that the whole page is viewable.

Good presentation of the headlines. Biggest news is obvious and there are links to other topics.

I like the dark background.

Like the page set up, easy to follow

My eye drawn to the larger photo and then the smaller photo.

Good graphics, easy to read against the dark background. Convenient navigation to related stories on the right.

Good layout and use of color.

I would go to the headline story. 

I like the boxes on the left:shows, top stories, politics, etc. and the detail boxes that appear to the right of them when the cursor goes over them.

Good color on the left.

Pulled to the photos and video.

Each topic includes the headline and gives the title of the story included in that topic.

Articles and pictures make me want to go there.

I like it because it brings up outline news.

Like to see the latest headlines in white space.

 

Well-organized, logical, easy to read.

Very clear and concise.

 

 

I like that there’s more variety.

 

 

I would read to find out the anticipated targets.

 

 

Good special reports from reporters.

 

 

Looks ok to the eye.