THE EFFECTS OF CREEPING COMMERCIALISM ON CHILDREN’S PUBLIC
TELEVISION PROGRAMMING ON THE STRENGTH OF RELATIONSHIP
BETWEEN PBS AND PARENTS OF CHILD VIEWERS
By
CHRISTINA REGAN
A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF ARTS IN MASS COMMUNICATION
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
2005
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I thank my parents for supporting me both emotionally and financially throughout
my college career. Without their love and encouragement I would not be where I am
today. I also thank my advisor and committee members for their guidance and
responsive assistance, no matter how short notice the request.
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
page
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ii
LIST OF TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v
LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vi
ABSTRACT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . vii
CHAPTER
1
INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
2
LITERATURE REVIEW . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Critique of Commercialization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Defense of Commercialization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Theoretical Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Research Questions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
3
METHODOLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
Sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4
25
25
27
27
RESULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Description of Sample . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Results That Test the Hypothesis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Additional Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
5
DISCUSSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
6
CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
iii
APPENDIX
A
SURVEY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
B
ORIGINAL SCALE OF RELATIONSHIP STRENGTH INDICATORS . . . . . . . . 55
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
iv
LIST OF TABLES
Table
page
1
Factor analysis of the instrument used to measure relationship strength . . . . . . . 30
2
Factor analysis of the instrument used to measure level commercial perception . 32
3
Correlation analysis between perceived commercialism and intimacy . . . . . . . . . 33
4
Correlation analysis between perceived commercialism and partner quality . . . . 34
5
Correlation analysis between perceived commercialism and commitment . . . . . . 35
6
Descending mean scores of the 16 relationship strength survey questions . . . . . . 36
7
Child viewing frequency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
8
Parent viewing frequency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
9
Frequency data of overall attitude toward PBS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37
10
Frequency table for question 22 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
11
Frequency table for question 23 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
12
Frequency table for question 24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
13
Frequency table for question 25 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
14
Analysis of variance of the three relationship strength factors and question 22 . . 40
15
Analysis of variance of the three relationship strength factors and question 23 . . 40
16
Analysis of variance of the three relationship strength factors and question 24 . . 41
17
Analysis of variance of the three relationship strength factors and question 25 . . 41
v
LIST OF FIGURES
Figures
page
1
Conceptual Model of Relationship Strength . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2
Ethnic Frequency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
3
Gender Frequency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
4
Income Frequency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
5
Age Frequency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
vi
Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in Mass Communication
THE EFFECTS OF CREEPING COMMERCIALISM ON CHILDREN’S PUBLIC
TELEVISION PROGRAMMING ON THE STRENGTH OF RELATIONSHIP
BETWEEN PBS AND PARENTS OF CHILD VIEWERS
By
Christina Regan
May 2005
Chair: Churchill Roberts
Major Department: Mass Communication
Over the years corporate sponsor messages before and after children’s public
television programming on PBS have begun to look increasingly more commercialized.
In this multi-channel media environment, a competitive edge is necessary for survival. In
order to compete with cable and other commercial networks, PBS has adopted a more
market-driven business model. Critics argue this decision weakens PBS’ position in the
market and essentially goes against its mission of noncommercial public service
broadcasting.
The purpose of this study was to first determine if parents perceive this increased
commercialization and second to see if that perception had any effect on their strength of
relationship with PBS. The data collected from the survey research demonstrated no
significant correlation between perceived commercialism and PBS/parent relationship
strength.
vii
This result supports consumer brand relationship theory which suggests that brand
images are able to withstand acts of transgression (increased commercialism) as long as
they possess positive brand qualitites. In the case of PBS, their high quality educational
children’s programming outweighs any detrimental effects increased commercialism may
have on their relationship with parents of child viewers.
viii
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
One day an Arab and his camel were crossing the desert. At night the Arab pitched
his tent and the camel asked the Arab if he could put his nose in for warmth. The
Arab agreed. So the camel's nose became warm and after a while the temperature
dropped. This time the camel asked the Arab if he could put his fore legs in
because they were very cold. The Arab reluctantly agreed. After sometime, the
camel told the Arab that if he did not warm his hind legs he would be unable to
walk the next morning. Again the Arab agreed. But once the camel’s hind legs
were in there was no room for the Arab and he was kicked out. (Singh, 2000)
“The Camel and the Arab”, a fable from Ancient India, serves as a cautionary tale
shedding light on the issue of “creeping commercialism” currently facing public
television in the United States. The once absolute laws written into the Communications
Act of 1934, banning all forms of advertising on public stations, have been tweaked and
stretched to the point where euphemisms like “enhanced underwriter acknowledgments”
are now commonplace. They are used to disguise the distinctly commercial presence of
advertiser messages that has recently invaded the public airwaves. However,
euphemisms cannot hide their true nature forever and people are finally starting to
wonder whether or not the legendary camel’s nose has officially slipped under the tent
(Redmont, 2000).
This past December, the University of Chicago held a conference titled The Future
of Public Television. The purpose of the conference was to stimulate a discussion on
ways to secure public television’s future. Industry professionals such as John Lawson,
president and CEO of the Association of Public Television Stations (APTS), and
academics such as Dale Kunkel, professor of communication at the University of
1
2
Arizona, assembled to discuss this pertinent topic. During the “open mike” section of the
seminar devoted to children’s public television programming, the one same question
seemed to be common amongst the audience; where will PBS draw the line in regards to
the commercialization of its coveted children’s programming?
At the threshold of this new digital era, PBS, and the local stations that support it,
have come to a crossroads; should public television be allowed to continue down
commercial lane and hope for the best, or should funding strategies be revised to allow
for a truly noncommercial public network to pave the way into the 21st century of digital
communication? This line of questioning seems to be continually directed at children’s
programming due to children’s massive media consumption and susceptibility to the
pitfalls of increased commercialism. The image of child as consumer is one that many
have problems with, especially when in reference to supposedly noncommercial PBS
programming.
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
PBS KIDS is the branch of PBS that is specifically devoted to children. It promises
to broaden children’s horizons through learning, discovery and play. The PBS web site
assures viewers and parents that PBS programs are designed to help children develop
cognitive, social, emotional and physical skills. PBS KIDS is dedicated to producing
high quality educational programming and therefore, makes sure that experienced
educational television producers involve children, educational researchers, parents,
teachers, day care providers and subject-matter experts during development and
production of all programs. PBS producers are also required to provide educational
support materials for children and their parents. This supplemental material encourages
children to venture away from the television toward a more independent routine of
learning and discovering (“PBS KIDS,” 2004). Public television programming inspires
children to try new things every day. As they sing in one of PBS’ popular children’s
programs ZOOM, “If you like what you see, turn off the TV, and do it!”
PBS KIDS’ new advertising campaign demonstrates the network’s commitment to
helping kids live up to their potential with the slogan “Be More.” PBS is well aware of
the growing competition from commercial stations and they know the one advantage they
have over these competing networks is brand identity. Lesli Rotenburg, PBS Senior Vice
President of Brand Management and Strategic Positioning, said that “The trust that
parents place in our brand is tremendously important to us at PBS and it’s something that
we want to continue to build” (PBS KIDS Children’s Media Brand,” 2002, para.2). One
3
4
of the advertisements in the print campaign, directed by the ad agency One and All,
illustrates the PBS objective of helping kids’ imaginations take flight. A young boy is
pictured being held in the air with arms outstretched like an airplane. The headline reads,
“You can tell him he can’t fly, but he’ll never hear you over the roar of the engines.”
The rest of the copy continues, “At PBS KIDS, shows like Dragon Tales, spark your
child’s imagination, encouraging him to believe in all kinds of things, especially himself.
And once kids believe in themselves they can rise above just about anything.” The tag
line concludes, “PBS KIDS: Be More Empowered” (“PBS KIDS Children’s Media
Brand,” 2002, para. 6).
This “Be More” campaign is an excellent branding tool that solidifies PBS’
position in the market. However, in the current multichannel media environment, it is not
enough to simply have a solid position. A network must possess a unique angle. Unlike
any other network, PBS KIDS provides quality programming free of commercial
intrusion. However, due to loosened guidelines and insufficient funding, this novel brand
image is teetering on an unstable edge.
A type of funding resource, known as underwriting acknowledgments, has been
eating away at the noncommercial foundation of public television for years. Recently,
underwriting spots on public television have begun to look more and more like real
commercials. When the Communications Act of 1934 was first passed it forbade
noncommercial stations from accepting monetary compensation for airing spots that
aimed to “promote any service, facility or product offered by any person who is engaged
in such offering for profit.” (Redmont, 2000, para.3) This restriction was made in an
attempt to prevent any form of commercials, beyond the obligatory announcement of a
supporting company’s name, from appearing on noncommercial stations. However,
5
during President Ronald Reagan’s era of deregulation this tenet of the Act was essentially
ignored.
In 1984, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) reworked the policy
and allowed public broadcasters to air enhanced underwriter acknowledgments. The
enhancement meant the inclusion of “value neutral” product line or service descriptions
and corporate slogans and logos that served to identify, rather than promote. In the past,
PBS set up strict guidelines that limited enhanced underwriter spots to 15 seconds. As
recently as 1999 a study by the PBS board found that it was uncommon for local stations
to air spots over 15 seconds (Redmont, 2000). However, the public broadcasting
landscape is rapidly changing. Richard Lehner, general manager of WUFT-TV (PBS
GAINESVILLE), says that “Now most local public stations air 30 second spots and
rarely restrict themselves to the guidelines set up by PBS” (personal communication,
September 17, 2004). He describes the history of underwriter acknowledgments in terms
of a spectrum. On one end of the spectrum there are strict guidelines monitoring content
and time constraints and on the other end there lies a more relaxed environment run by
local stations interested in keeping up revenue streams amidst a growing competitive
market. Lehner says that “Years ago we were way over to the left, nowhere near what we
were permitted to do by law. Now we have shifted all the way to the other side placing
us right on the edge of what the law allows us to do” (personal communication,
September 17, 2004).
The local stations are not the only ones pushing the envelope. The 30-second
spots have infiltrated PBS’ national lineup as well. Now executives are looking to lower
the price of these lengthened credits in the hopes of appealing to even more corporate
underwriters. Jeremy Egner (2004), journalist for Current, a newspaper about public
6
television and radio in the United States, calls attention to the irony of this newfound
tolerance. He says that:
As the economy and competition make it harder to sell underwriting, public TV
stations increasingly accept the lengthened credits. PBS itself no longer opposes
them, as it did in 1995 when it caused a near-rebellion by trying to extend national
15-second limits to local credits airing adjacent to PBS programs. (para. 4)
In other words, PBS may be lagging behind the local public stations when it comes to
acceptance of increased commercialism, but the fact remains that they are warming up to
an idea they once vehemently opposed.
In her chapter “Advertising on Public Television: A Look at PBS” from the book
Public Broadcasting and the Public Interest, Judi Cook (2003) examines the reality of
commercial influences on PBS. Through a content analysis of WGBH-2 (PBS
BOSTON), Cook analyzes the extent to which corporate sponsorships have become a
staple of PBS programming. Cook draws interesting conclusions from her results that
point to children as being a favorite target of corporate sponsors (p. 85).
The results of her study showed the largest amount of underwriting appeared in
the 8:00-10:00 AM slot with the next largest slot being 6:00-8:00 AM. The fact that
children’s programming appears during these segments suggests that children are the
most targeted consumers. Cook also looked at the genre of each underwriting spot and
finds that they fall into three main categories; arts/culture, children and history. Of the
three possible genres, 82.5% of underwriting spots appeared before and after children’s
programming, again suggesting that children are the targeted consumers of PBS
underwriting (p.89).
Cook also coded underwriting spots into 11 business categories; food and
beverage, toys, technology, telecommunications, healthcare and pharmaceuticals, retailgeneral, financial and insurance, entertainment, apparel and jewelry, automobiles, and
7
education. The two largest product categories were “food and beverage” at 35.1% and
“toys” at 11.5%. This again supports the idea that children are being targeted as
consumers on public television. Corporations such as Juicy Juice, Kellogg’s, Chuck E.
Cheese and KB toys view PBS as a viable resource for attracting their most sought after
audience—kids. Cook also mentioned that the inclusion of corporate logos and symbols
present in 93.8% of the sample spots was significant in that it gave children, many of
whom are too young to read, something to understand and retain (p.91-92).
Cook concludes that advertising on public television is “alive and well,” and
disturbingly pointed at children. “Reducing children to commodities and serving them
up to underwriters is not exactly something one normally associates with public
television. And yet, this appears to be the way of the future” (p.93).
Ultimately, it becomes a matter of whether the ends justify the means. PBS KIDS
is an essential component of the television industry. It embodies the pure goal of not
only teaching children the facts about math, science and history, but also of encouraging
them to love learning and believe in themselves. Does public television’s contribution to
child development justify the use of commercials as a funding resource? Or, does public
television’s distorted claims of being noncommercial while displaying blatant forms of
commercialism justify a change in the system? The above discussion clearly presents the
importance of this issue. However, before any decision-making or policy proposals can
be introduced, both sides of the issue must be explained.
Critique of Commercialization
Critics of “creeping commercialism” believe PBS learned the wrong lessons from
its competitors. Cable networks such as The Disney Channel and Nickelodeon are
backed by giant corporations with a great deal of time and money to spend on creating
quality children’s programming. This programming is in direct competition with what
8
PBS has to offer. Instead of retaining its uniqueness and increasing the entertainment
value of its shows, PBS focused on letting advertisers increase the production value of
their commercials. This mistake eliminated the one thing that distinguished PBS from its
competitors—no advertising (Guterman, 2003, para.1).
Corporate underwriters are given liberties, in the form of message enhancement,
that exceed simple identification and flirt heavily with outright promotion. In his book
Made Possible By…The Death of Public Broadcasting in the United States, James
Ledbetter (1997) refers to underwriter acknowledgments in the early 1980’s as “dull,
tombstone-like on-screen promotions.” In the late 1980s, PBS allowed underwriters to
add their logos, store locations and even descriptions of their products into their
messages. Today corporations produce full-motion video productions for their
underwriting spots complete with music, actors and graphics. These enhanced spots are
not simply a function of improving technologies. They are a testament to underwriters’
willingness to invest in a high quality production they believe will attract a desired
audience. The days of philanthropic donations are over; now program funding comes
directly from the advertising departments of contributing corporations (Cook, 2003,
p.90).
Critics argue that these extended liberties and funding flaws gamble with a parent’s
ability to trust PBS KIDS. They expose children to a form of advertising that by the
historical definition of noncommercial public television should not exist. Sesame Street,
a show devoted to the education of children and noncommercialism, used to end each
episode with the familiar tagline, “this show has been brought to you by the letter Z and
the number 2.” Now at the end of Sesame Street, children and parents are forced to listen
to a new commercial tune. “Pfizer brings parents the letter Z for Zithromax.” This audio
is then accompanied by an enhanced underwriter acknowledgment featuring children in
9
front of a chalkboard learning the “ABC’s of antibiotics” (Cook, 2003, p.86). The spot
promises that more information on Zithromax is “just a click away” and gives the
audience the pharmaceutical company’s web address. In its March 2000 letter to PBS
entitled “The Commercialism of Children’s Public Television,” the activist group FAIR
argued that “The Zithromax ad’s exotic animals and outsized toys, meant to evoke the
product’s logo, also serve to make a prescription-only drug appealing to preschool
viewers” (FAIR, 2000, para.6). Ledbetter (1997) and other critics like him believe this
type of marketing on a “system conceived as an advertising-free beacon of
enlightenment” is unacceptable on public television (p.17).
Another example of how underwriters have pushed the commercial envelope can
be found in products that are much more familiar to children than Zithromax. One ad
announces, “Chuck E. Cheese proudly supports PBS KIDS’ television, where a kid can
be a kid.” This voice-over, combined with the Chuck E. Cheese jingle and mascot,
creates a certain ambiguity surrounding whether PBS or Chuck E. Cheese is the place
where a kid can be a kid. McDonald’s is another sponsor that blurs this line between
slogan identification and promotion. In their announcement an animated Ronald
McDonald opens a book releasing a red happy meal box. The trademark golden arches
take flight and transform the dull room into a magical wonderland. The voice over says,
“McDonald’s is happy to support children’s television.” The unnecessary visual aspects
of this ad blatantly connect McDonald’s Happy Meals with having fun (FAIR, 2000).
Other underwriters go even further and link their products to helping kids learn and
enjoy reading. For example, the Arthur sponsor, Post Alpha Bits cereal, tells its viewers
about, “Post Alpha-Bits cereal: 26 little letters that make up a million words, that tell
billions of stories- and it all starts with ABC.” FAIR suggested this type of message
10
falsely linked a cereal with getting kids excited about reading and urged PBS to use
stricter guidelines for underwriter messages (FAIR, 2000).
The above examples illustrate how PBS stations seem to be accelerating toward
commercialism. This acceleration not only negatively impacts how parents, children and
society as a whole may view PBS, but it also impacts Congress. In an article published
in Current entitled “We take another step in a seductive dance with commerce,” Willard
Rowland (2003) says that “Our weakening position on noncommercialism makes it
difficult to tell Congress that we remain true to basic ‘noncommercial, educational’
tenets” (para.10). In other words, PBS is sending out a subtle message that it is content
to replace federal funding with growing commercial support.
This notion of commercialism does not preside solely in the underwriting credits
before and after PBS programs. Commercialism has even broader implications when it is
addressed in the form of merchandising. Popular shows such as Barney & Friends and
Teletubbies have raked in millions of dollars from merchandising. This accomplishment
has created another source of controversy for the public stations. In a Journal of
Business Ethics article entitled “Ethics and the Business of Children’s Public Television
Programming,” William Brown (2002) asks; “Does the mass marketing of characterrelated merchandise, such as the ‘tickle me Elmo’ doll during the holiday season, cross a
moral line” (p. 74)? Brown goes on to argue that this type of merchandising taints the
sanctity of the noncommercial ideal and sacrifices the moral trust of the public. The
merchandising market is where the idea of licensing gets to the heart of the business of
children’s television programming.
Book licensing is an important endeavor in the publishing industry. The publishing
industry analyzes the children’s market and actively pursues licensed books from PBS
programs. Scholastic Entertainment targets preschoolers with its Teletubbies books and
11
early readers with its Arthur titles. “The fact that licensers plan their licensing and
promotional strategies a year and a half before a TV show premieres raises questions
about whether the ‘educational’ content of the programming drives the book marketing or
if merchandising possibilities drive the program content” (p.77). Money collected from
licensing agreements is another source of revenue that supports PBS. If licensers are
tempted to back the shows that have the most merchandising potential it would be safe to
assume that this form of commercialism is driving program content. This idea of
merchandising potential could also be the reason behind the recent shift in PBS KIDS’
program format from live action to animation.
A 2002 Markle Foundation study interviewed children’s media professionals and
found that they believe PBS is drifting away from its educational mission. They blame
this transgression partly on the network’s over reliance on animated programs. Years
ago, the dominant form of programming on PBS was live action shows such as Sesame
Street, Mr. Roger’s Neighborhood and Reading Rainbow. Experts say these types of
shows benefit children. Dorothy Singer, CO- Director of the Television and Consultation
Center at Yale University and consultant on Barney & Friends, cites research that
suggests kids learn more from shows containing at least one real-life character. Daniel
Anderson, a psychology professor at the University of Massachusetts and national
advisory board member for PBS’ Ready to Learn program, agrees with Singer and
stresses the importance of children detecting real people that act as a bridge between
reality and imagination (McGuinn, 2002, para.30).
Nowadays, when tuned to PBS KIDS, one is more likely to see a cartoon than a
live action show. Cartoons became such a popular genre that now 15 out of the 25 shows
on PBS KIDS are animated. Many critics are not bothered by the educational integrity of
12
animation, but they believe it is more an issue of quantity. The abundance of cartoons
limits the presence of a diverse program schedule, thus limiting educational possibilities.
There are distinct economic benefits that go along with a dominantly animated
schedule. It is easy to replace the English-speaking cartoons with foreign language
voice-overs, which makes for a seamless transition into the overseas market. Animated
characters, such as Arthur, work well in the merchandising market of toys, tooth brushes,
pajamas etc. PBS does receive a certain amount of the profits from merchandising deals,
but most of the money goes right back to the authors or production companies that
conceptualize many of the shows. Knowing they can bank on merchandising profits and
international rights, producers are willing to sell an animated program to PBS for much
less than a live action show (McGuinn, 2002). All these factors boil down to one thing;
animation is cheap. For both children and parents money, rather than public service, has
become the bottom line for the public broadcasting system.
It is evident that various forms of commercialism have successfully crept their way
into the public television sphere. This critique has clearly revealed two ways in which
programming has felt the effects. One, underwriter acknowledgments after children’s
programming have become so enhanced that they serve to promote products to children,
rather than simply identify them. And, two, educational content is at the mercy of
whatever programs production companies think will be most profitable. The title of
Rowland’s (2003) article equates PBS’ growing commercial relationship with a seductive
dance. Enhanced underwriter acknowledgments and licensing control are just two more
steps PBS has taken in this dance. The remaining question is whether the music will
ever stop or will this dance continue until public television is a shadow of its former self?
13
Defense of Commercialization
However, not everyone is against this shift toward a more commercial public
broadcasting system. In PBS’ defense, the reason for the increasing commercialization is
perfectly understandable. In 1967 the Carnegie Commission was established to address
the issue of advertisers ability to influence the range and quality of programs available to
viewers on commercial television. The Carnegie Commission foresaw public television
as an alternative to commercial television. “It clearly positioned public television as a
noncommercial alternative to the market-driven content of commercial television. And
yet the public broadcasting system was never fully equipped to operate without the help
of corporate sponsorship” (Cook, 2003). From its inception public television was
handicapped when attempts to fund it with a 2% tax on television receivers was denied.
As the market becomes more and more competitive and government support continues to
dwindle, PBS and its local affiliates have become increasingly vulnerable to the lure of
corporate sponsorships. With its back against the wall, private sponsors seem like the
easiest way out of public television’s financial troubles (Rowland, 2003).
Defenders of commercial support as a viable funding resource for PBS believe
advertising will neither destroy public television’s integrity nor influence its
programming content. The PBS web site boasts that funding sources for public television
are more diverse than any other media outlet in the country. Contrary to the critics belief
that the money received from corporate sponsors will govern all content, defenders argue
that the above mentioned funding diversity is a key element in the preservation of a free
and independent public television system. Therefore, PBS welcomes national program
underwriters from a variety of companies.
Defenders also believe that increased underwriter acknowledgments will have little
effect on the public’s trust in the PBS brand image. Mike Hardgrove, president of
14
KETC-TV in St. Louis, conducted a focus group study and concluded that viewers
already think underwriting is advertising and are not bothered by it-as long as it remains
tasteful (Behrens, 1995). Also, a 2004 Roper Poll commissioned by the Public
Broadcasting Service suggests increased commercialization has had little impact on the
public trust. According to the poll, PBS is the most trusted organization in America,
beating out three branches of government and the rest of the media (Eggerton, 2004).
The largest block of PBS programming last season consisted of 801 hours of
children’s programming (38%). PBS programs are watched each week by an average of
87 million viewers. These statistics show that PBS KIDS is well-equipped to compete
with cable networks, such as Discovery Kids, whose audience is less than half of that of
PBS (Auletta, 2004). Also, as long as acknowledgments are aired during station breaks,
rather than in the middle of programs, PBS will retain the essential uniqueness separating
it from the rest of the commercial networks. PBS uses a second unique angle, lack of
clutter, in order to sell air-time to corporations. This gives PBS an incentive to limit the
amount and length of its commercials. This idea directly contradicts critics beliefs that
commercialism will become more and more prevalent until all lines of separation have
been erased.
Therefore, creeping commercialism has not shown any significant impact
on PBS’ ability to capture the public trust or maintain its competitive edge and
uniqueness.
In terms of animation, PBS believes this format both attracts kids and offers an
educational and pro-social curriculum. Sandra Calvert, a Georgetown University
professor who has written widely on children’s television, praises the benefits of
cartoons. She believes that “Unlike Sesame Street, which jumps from scene to
unconnected scene (a ‘magazine format’), the cartoons unfold as narratives which can
help children develop their memories and understand literary concepts like
15
foreshadowing” (McGuinn, 2002, para.31). PBS did not purposefully set out to create a
cartoon-dominated line-up. When the network was trying to strengthen its programming
it went after shows that engaged both children and their parents. Attractive economics
combined with the fact that so many of the PBS animated shows gained a popular
following, lead to a cartoon-dominated line-up that most people in the industry support.
Times are changing and defenders argue that critics of commercialism live in an
ideal world if they think PBS can survive without changing too. Some public
broadcasting executives argue that their stations should be given the option of converting
from “noncommercial” to “nonprofit” broadcasters, which would maintain high quality
standards, but sell commercials (“Should pubcasters go more commercial?,” 2002). Hal
Bouton, president of WTVI-TV in North Carolina understands that some rural stations
may need federal funding and state education grants to continue operation. However,
community stations in medium to large markets may not have these options due to
decreased federal funding and must turn to advertising as a viable alternative. Bouton
(1995) urges public stations to:
Change with the times or be responsible for the loss of our important role in the
modern telecommunications environment. Let's take control of our future, not have
it dictated by Congress. They have given us the opportunity to steer a new course.
Let's make the most of this opportunity to build an even stronger public
broadcasting system for our nation. (para.9)
A nonprofit broadcasting license would still work to serve the public interest. The only
difference would be the undisputed acceptance of a more flexible and lucrative revenue
source.
Both sides of this debate have merit. Critics think that loosening underwriting
regulations is a violation of the PBS mission statement. As public television goes more
and more commercial, not only with enhanced underwriting acknowledgments, but with
merchandising as well, it jeopardizes the public trust and allows commercialism to
16
intrude on coveted educational content. Defenders, on the other hand, believe going
commercial is a logical and necessary step to competing against established commercial
networks. As Daniel Anderson, board member for PBS’ Ready to Learn program said,
“It’s simply a matter of survival” (personal communication, November 15, 2004).
While scholars and media professionals may not agree on the effects of
commercialism on PBS KIDS, it is clear that one can study these effects by examining
the relationship between the PBS and its viewers. So far, research concerning this topic
has been biased and over-generalized. For example, PBS was praised as being the
number one most trusted organization in the country in a 2004 study commissioned by
PBS. It is difficult to establish survey credibility when the organization at the top of the
list is the very organization that commissioned the study. It is also hard to assume that
public opinion polls concerning PBS as a whole can be used to describe public opinion
specifically concerning children’s programming. A poll commissioned by the
Corporation for Public Broadcasting (PBS’s funding counterpart) suggested that the
public is largely accepting of the amount of commercial activity engaged in by public
television (Market Facts, CPB Report, 1997). However, this sentiment may be very
different when the lens is focused on PBS KIDS, as children, lacking in cognitive
development, are more vulnerable to commercial messages (Paradise, 2004).
Theoretical Framework
This literature review has revealed that the relationship between the public and
PBS is the key to discovering the tangible consequences to creeping commercialism. By
studying the relationship between PBS and its consumers it may be possible to predict
whether increased commercialism will have detrimental effects on PBS’ image and
subsequently its sources of revenue (i.e. member donations). It is important to look at
this issue through the framework of relationship theory. This theory provides a plethora
17
of information concerning the purpose of relationships and what needs to be present for
them to remain stable.
Susan Fournier’s (1998) article “Consumers and Their Brands: Developing
Relationship Theory in Consumer Research,” provides a framework for better
understanding the relationships consumers form with the brands they use. In this case,
consumers are viewers and the brand they know and use is PBS. By studying the
relationship between viewers and PBS, it can be determined whether the actions of PBS
concerning commercialism are accepted by the public or are interpreted as a
transgression that fosters instability and relational deterioration.
Relationship theory incorporates four core assumptions. First, relationships
involve an equal exchange between active and interrelated partners. Second,
relationships are purposeful, involving meaning to the persons who engage them. Third,
relationships range across several dimensions and take many forms, providing a
multitude of possible benefits for each participant. Fourth, relationships evolve and
change over a series of interactions and in response to alterations in the environment
(Fournier, 1998). These four assumptions, abbreviated as reciprocity, meaning,
multiplicity and temporality, are discussed below.
Fournier notes that in order for a relationship to truly exist, interdependence and a
mutual effort (reciprocity) between partners must be present. “The partners must
collectively affect, define and redefine the relationship” (Fournier, p.344). She then goes
on to conceptualize the brand as an active participant in the relationship, rather than a
passive object of marketing strategies. Personification of the brand highlights a way in
which the brand can be involved in a partnership with the consumer. “The human
activity of anthropomorphizing inanimate objects has been identified as universal in
virtually all societies” (Brown, 1991). Theories of animism suggest that there is a need
18
to attribute human qualities to inanimate objects in order to interact with the nonmaterial
world. Consumers are extremely willing to think about brands as if they were human,
assigning them personal qualities the same way they would a friend (Aaker, 1997). This
willingness suggests an acceptance of brands as a reciprocal member of the consumerbrand relationship.
Relationships are developed for specific reasons and foster a great deal of meaning.
“Since the relationship is, in essence what the relationship means, understanding a given
relationship requires a mastery of the meanings the relationship provides to the person
who engages it” (Fournier, 1998, p.346). Fournier discusses the psychological as a major
source of meaning.
Psychologically, relationships may help resolve life themes involving profound
changes or small daily occurrences (Csikszentmihalyi and Beattie, 1979). These
profound themes are rooted in personal history and thus, central to one’s concept of self.
They are role-changing events, such as graduation or retirement. Relationships are also
rooted in the present concerns of completing daily tasks (Klinger, 1987). These
relationships have little effect on one’s self-concept. To put this explanation of
psychological meaning into context, a relationship between a parent and PBS KIDS may
be meaningful in terms of current concerns. In other words, parents use the network as a
sort of baby-sitter to keep the children entertained while they complete important work.
Fournier (1998) notes that relationships may add significant meaning to the lives of
people that engage in them.
The last two core assumptions of relationship theory are multiplicity and
temporality. Relationships are so intricate and multifaceted that it is important to
distinguish them using certain criteria. For example, relationships can be categorized by
the nature of the benefits they bestow upon each participant. These benefits may be
19
psychological (reassurance of self worth, announcement of image, social integration) or
they may be rewards of security, guidance, comfort, etc. (Fournier, 1998). Relationships
are also categorized by the types of bonds formed between the participants. These bonds
may be obligatory ones lacking in significant emotional involvement. Or, they may be
emotionally based, ranging in intensity from casual friendships to passionate love affairs
(Fehr & Russell, 1991).
Temporality is a necessary assumption made to differentiate a relationship from an
isolated encounter. Relationships are a series of exchanges occurring within an evolving
environment. The process of relationship development is compartmentalized into five
phases; initiation, growth, maintenance, deterioration and dissolution (Levinger, 1983).
Each stage determines a change in nature (progression from friends to lovers) or level of
intensity (increase or decrease in the amount of emotional involvement) of the
relationship. These stages get at the heart of what relationship theory is all about and
how it can be used to study the effects of a problem, such as creeping commercialism.
The above review of relationship theory illustrates how “the projects, concerns and
themes that people use to define themselves can be played out in the cultivation of brand
relationships and how those relationships, in turn, can affect the cultivation of one’s self
concept” (Fournier, 1998). It is equally important to understand not only how people are
affected by the relationships they form, but what qualities and situations make those
relationships strong in the first place.
According to the article “When Good Brands Do Bad” by Jennifer Aaker, Susan
Fournier and Adam Brasel (2004), two factors influence the direction and stability of
relational bonds. The first factor is called personality effects on relationships. Research
has shown that relationships are influenced by the personalities of the partners involved.
Different characteristics such as status, vitality, openness, etc., are all observed and noted
20
during relational interactions. Each person takes these personality traits into account and
constructs a mental image of the partner’s role in the relationship (Aaker et al., 2004).
The above mentioned article identifies two templates of brand personalities; sincere and
exciting.
Sincere personalities are very popular with classic brand products such as Hallmark
and Coca Cola. This strategy is either used by small companies to gain the warmer more
caring competitive advantage or by large companies to appear more accessible and downto-earth. Research shows that sincere brands promote a nurturing, warm, family-oriented
and traditional image. All of these qualities are positively associated with relationship
strength. Sincerity also captures a partner’s trustworthiness and dependability, which are
two important qualities for relationship growth.
A second personality type is referred to as the exciting brand image. This image is
built around qualities of energy, youthfulness and innovation. Critics argue that although
this tactic is attention getting, it can sometimes appear too gimmicky in the eyes of the
consumer. Therefore the exciting brand image may harbor disadvantages in maintaining
legitimate long-term relationships (Aaker et al., 2004).
In addition to personality effects, an act of transgression is the second factor that
influences relationship stability. “Transgression refers to a violation of the implicit or
explicit rules guiding relationship performance and evaluation” (Metts, 1994). It is
argued that the way problems are resolved within a relationship reveals the strength of
that bond more than all the positive attributes put together. In other words, the true status
of a relationship is made evident under adverse conditions. “Transgressions provide
opportunities for learning about the qualities of the relationship partner, which guides
subsequent development paths. Accordingly, although transgressions will vary in their
severity and cause and differ in their ultimate negotiations, all are significant in their
21
ability to affect relationship progress” (Aaker et al., 2004). Research has shown that
once transgressions start affecting consumer perception of brand image, it is extremely
difficult to slow the relationship decline. Despite recovery efforts that may appear
successful in the short run, this deterioration will continue to occur (Maxham &
Netemeyer, 2002).
More optimistic researchers believe negative transgressions can be rectified. “Of
particular note is the relationship context in which transgression is committed, such that
relationship-serving biases dilute the negative effects of transgressions in strong unions
and past positives cancel them in the long-standing relations” (Aaker et al., 2004, p.3).
Partners possessing positive personality traits may also successfully counteract the effects
of transgressions.
At this point, clear indicators are needed to determine overall relationship quality,
depth and strength. A conceptual model of relationship quality developed from research
in the interpersonal field can serve as an excellent starting point for establishing a
coherent framework. The following flowchart taken from Fournier’s (1998) research on
relationship theory illustrates the above-mentioned framework.
22
Brand Partner Quality
Satisfaction
Self-Connection
Commitment
Intimacy
Partner Quality
Relationship Strength/Stability
Figure 1. Conceptual Model of Relationship Strength
Conceptual Definitions: (Fournier, 1998 and Aaker et al., 2004)
Satisfaction- Happiness in the relationship; does the brand perform as well as
expected?
Self-Connection- The degree to which the brand delivers on important identity
concerns, tasks or themes, expressing a significant aspect of self.
Commitment- An enduring desire to continue the relationship combined with a to
make efforts toward that end.
Intimacy- The presence of an elaborate knowledge structure around the brand
image.
Partner Quality- The perceived status of the role of the partner coming from the
consumer’s judgment of the brand’s overall dependability, reliability and
predictability in executing its role in the partnership and the brands adherence to
the rules governing the relationship.
Figure 1 and the following conceptual definitions provide a foundation for future
research to be built upon. Different aspects of the relationship between PBS and the
public have been alluded to in the analysis of relationship theory. Upon initial
investigation, it seems PBS is more than just another network. In comparison to
commercial networks, PBS can boast a certain amount of sincerity and integrity. It is
trusted by the community and therefore attains high levels of brand partner quality.
Earlier this year, Angela Paradise, a doctoral student at the University of
Massachusetts, conducted a focus group study among parents of PBS viewers. From her
23
interviews, Paradise detected four highly interrelated themes pertaining to the
commercialization of PBS KIDS: (1) the presence of corporate underwriting; (2) the
branding, licensing, and merchandising of PBS KIDS; (3) the blurring of PBS KIDS with
network and cable television; and (4) the positioning of the young child as a consumer
(Paradise, 2004). Since these issues have already been assessed in a qualitative manner,
it is only natural that future research would involve a quantitative study to determine
whether there is a relationship between parent’s perceived awareness of commercialism
and the strength of their relationship with PBS. Therefore, in order to better understand
this issue, a relationship study using the above mentioned conceptual model must be
conducted.
Research Questions
RQ1: Are parents aware of the increased commercialism on PBS KIDS?
RQ2: How does perceived commercialism affect the strength of the relationship
between parents and PBS?
Hypothesis
H: If parents perceive commercialism before and after children’s programming on
PBS to have increased, then their relationship with PBS across the five factors
(commitment, satisfaction, intimacy, partner quality and self-connection) will
weaken.
HO: The relationship between parents and PBS will be neither positively nor
negatively affected by perception of commercialism.
CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
In order to answer the research questions proposed in the literature review a
quantitative study examining the relationship between two variables was conducted. One
criterion needed to determine the existence of a relationship is a correlation between
those two variables. In this case, the independent variable is perceived commercialism,
while the dependent variable is strength of the relationship between parents of child
viewers and PBS. Perceived commercialism refers to a parent’s awareness of the
commercial atmosphere surrounding PBS KIDS (i.e. length, number and production
value of underwriter acknowledgments and presence of PBS characters linked to products
in the corporate world). Strength of the viewer-brand relationship refers to how much
parents adhere to the conceptual definitions of the relationship strength indicators defined
in the above section.
The proposed method for this study is survey research. A questionnaire using two
different scales to measure the independent and the dependent variable was developed
and distributed to all members of the sample. The questionnaire was designed and pretested using proper structure and wording in order to control for response error. After
modifications from the pre-test were applied, a cover letter explaining the nature of the
study was attached to the survey and distributed to the sample.
24
25
Sample
The target population for this study is parents of children between the ages of 2 and
8 who watch children’s programming on PBS. The best way to target people who adhere
to these specific requirements is to use both nursery and elementary schools as a sample
source. After contacting schools in the Gainesville area, directors from Early Years
Learning Center, My School Child Care Center and O2B KIDS! agreed to distribute the
surveys to the teachers of their 2-5 year old classes. The surveys were sent home with
the children and then returned to the directors by the parents. Due to funding and
transportation constraints these schools were chosen using a convenience method of
sampling and therefore results can not be generalized to the greater population.
Surveys were also distributed using a mailing list. After applying for research
approval, Mel Lucas, Director of Research and Testing at the Alachua County School
Board, released a mailing list of 100 randomly sampled parents with children between the
ages of 5-8 attending a variety of schools in Alachua County. Overall, surveys were
given to the parents of approximately 500 children. After a three week distribution and
collection period, 54 parents responded to the survey giving this study a 10.8% response
rate.
Measurement
Two separate scales were used in this study to measure the independent and
dependent variables. Throughout the initial research process a useful scale for measuring
the independent variable (perceived commercialism) could not be found. Therefore, a
new scale to measure this variable was developed. Respondents were asked four
questions dealing with whether or not they think commercialism surrounding PBS has
increased, stayed the same or decreased. These three options were spread over a fivepoint scale. The four questions covered number, length and production value of
26
corporate sponsored messages and connection between PBS characters and products in
the commercial world (i.e. grocery and toy stores).
After the scale was constructed, it was pre-tested in a pilot study using a
convenience sample of 15 parents recruited from the Baby Gator Child Care Center on
the UF campus. Research participants made a few suggestions on how to reword
questions for clarity. Overall, pre-test results proved the survey questions were internally
consistent.
The second instrument, developed by Aaker, Fournier and Brasel (2004), is an
established measurement and has proven its reliability in previous research. The actual
scale used in this research was adapted in order to better measure the dependent variable
(see Appendix A). Similar to the scale of Aaker et al., the scale used in this study
incorporates the five relationship strength indicators, commitment, self-connection, brand
partner quality, satisfaction and intimacy. However, in this case, relationship strength
was measured using only 16 items of the originally 25-item scale. Certain questions from
the original scale had to be deleted because they did not make sense when asked in
reference to children’s public television programming. This instrument used a 7-point
scale with a 9 option as unable to rate.
In previous research, the reliability of this scale was established using test-retest
method and the Cronbach alpha of all five indicators was calculated as higher than .85.
The internal reliability of this scale can be easily assessed by looking at the responses
across the 7-point scale and making sure they are consistent. One limitation of this
method is that the scale has been adapted and therefore, previously researched statistics
are less likely to apply to the new scale the same way they did to the original.
27
Analysis
Survey questions 6 through 21 were asked in order to determine the respondent’s
strength of relationship with PBS. According to Aaker, Fournier and Brasel’s (2004)
previous research, the questions are broken down into five factors of relationship
strength: commitment, self-connection, satisfaction, intimacy, and partner quality. In
order to determine the validity of these relationship strength indicators a factor analysis
was performed to see which items attracted high and distinct loadings on which relational
factors. These factors were then grouped into indices and their raw scores were
calculated.
A bivariate correlation analysis was performed to determine the relationship
between the factors and each question of the instrument that measured the independent
variable (perceived commercialism). The Pearson correlation coefficient determined
whether or not the two variables were related. Descriptive statistics on the demographic
data were performed to get a better understanding of the sample. Analysis of variance
(ANOVA) was also run to see if there was any connection between perceived
commercialism and the relationship strength factors.
Limitations
Limitations of this study are apparent in the sample of participants. Not only is
the sample small, 54 respondents, but it is very homogenous and almost entirely
composed of white, middle to upper class women. The small sample size is due in large
part to the fact that surveys inherently produce a low response rate. Also, since the
survey questions targeted child caretakers, the over sampling of female respondents was
not surprising. Another limitation may have been the design of the two instruments used
to measure the independent and dependent variables. More sensitive scales may have
produced significant data.
CHAPTER 4
RESULTS
Description of Sample
The demographic data at the end of the survey are summarized in the following
four bar graphs (Figures 2-5). These graphs illustrate the sample’s predominance of
white females between the ages of 35 and 44. The sample’s most diverse demographic
was income which had a fairly even distribution of respondents across the monetary
ranges.
Figure 2. Ethnic Frequency
Figure 3. Gender Frequency
28
29
Figure 4. Income Frequency
Figure 5. Age Frequency
Results That Test the Hypothesis
In order to test for internal reliability of both instruments used in this study, a factor
analysis was performed. Even though the reliability of the relationship scale was
established in previous research, it is still necessary to run a factor analysis because this
study used an adaptation of the original instrument. By running this analysis it became
clear which relationship strength questions could be grouped together to form more
reliable dependent variables.
Table 1 shows survey questions measuring relationship strength can be separated
into three factors. Loadings were determined to be high and distinct if they were greater
than .8 and at least twice as big as any other loading for the corresponding question. For
example, question 10 had a high loading on factor one and it was also distinct because
.854 is twice as big as both .352 and .127. After analyzing all these numbers it was clear
that factor one is composed of questions 10, 12, 13, 16 and 18. Factor two is composed
of questions 15 and 17. The third and final factor had only one high and distinct loading
on question 9. Normally this would not be sufficient enough to warrant an entire factor,
30
however, due to the exploratory nature of this research all possibilities were considered
and analyzed.
Originally the survey questions were grouped into five categories, self-connection,
partner quality, intimacy, satisfaction and commitment. After looking at the factor
analysis results these five categories were collapsed into three. The majority of the
questions in factor one measured intimacy. Intimacy as defined by Susan Fournier
(1998) involves the presence of an elaborate knowledge structure surrounding the brand
image. The questions in factor two measured partner quality. This relationship strength
indicator involves the consumer’s judgment of the brand’s overall dependability,
reliability and predictability in executing its role and adhering to the rules of the
relationship. The one question in factor three measured commitment or the enduring
desire to continue one’s relationship with a brand.
Table 1. Factor analysis of the instrument used to measure relationship strength
Component
1
2
3
Q6: I am very loyal to children’s programming on
PBS
.715
.370
.389
Q7: I would continue to allow my child to watch
children’s programming on PBS even if it let me
down once or twice:
.457
.601
-.344
Q8: Children’s programming on PBS is helping my
child better than I expected
.175
.711
.303
31
Table 1. Continued
Component
1
2
3
Q9: I am so happy with children’s programming on
PBS I no longer look to other networks as
alternatives for my child’s television viewing
.135
.126
.861
Q10: I am likely to have my child watch children’s
programming on PBS one year from now
.854
.352
.127
Q11: Overall, I am satisfied with children’s
programming on PBS
.698
.560
.293
Q12: PBS programming fits well with my current
stage of life
.826
.324
.289
Q13: I am familiar with the range of children’s
programs and services PBS has to offer
.904
.155
-.089
Q14: PBS programming makes a statement about
what’s important to me in life
.293
.641
.369
Q15: I can always count on PBS to do what’s best
.218
.910
.080
Q16: I’d feel comfortable describing children’s
programming on PBS to someone who was not
familiar with it
.814
.417
.165
Q17: PBS programming lets me be a part of a
community of like-minded viewers
.262
.821
.137
Q18: I have become very knowledgeable about
children’s programming on PBS
.815
.166
.184
Q19: PBS really understands my needs in regards to
children’s programming
.471
.597
.475
Q20: I know I can hold PBS accountable for its
actions
.306
.686
.048
Q21: Given my impression of PBS, letting me down
would surprise me
.286
.508
.477
Intimacy
Partner
Quality
Commitment
New Variables =
Table 2 is a factor analysis of the independent variable (perceived commercialism).
These four questions are highly related; therefore, it is no surprise that they only load on
32
to one factor. It is apparent from the table that these loadings are high, however, they can
not be considered distinct because only one component exists.
Table 2. Factor analysis of the instrument used to measure level commercial perception
Component
1
Q22: Do you think the number of corporate sponsors mentioned
before and after children’s programming on PBS has decreased,
slightly decreased, stayed the same, slightly increased or increased?
.816
Q23: Do you think the connection between characters on PBS
programs (i.e. Clifford, Arthur, etc) and commercial products (i.e.
toys, food, etc) has decreased, slightly decreased, stayed the same,
slightly increased or increased?
.748
Q24: Do you think the length of corporate sponsor messages before
and after children’s programming on PBS has decreased, slightly
decreased, stayed the same, slightly increased or increased?
.868
Q25: Do you think the production value (i.e. mascots, logos,
animation) of corporate messages before and after children’s
programming on PBS has decreased, slightly decreased, stayed the
same, slightly increased or increased?
.914
Since this is a correlational study, the main finding that will lend support to the
hypothesis is a correlation between the three relationship strength indicators (determined
by the factor analysis in Table 1) and the four questions measuring the level of perceived
commercialism among parents. Tables 3-5 correlate intimacy, partner quality and
commitment with each of the perceived commercialism questions. The pearson
correlation coefficients and their significance are shown in boldface. None of the 12
cases shows any significant relationship between the two variables; therefore the data do
not support the hypothesis. The pearson correlation coefficient in every case is too low
and the significance value is too high for their to be any correlation between parents’
perception of commercialism on PBS and their relationship with the network.
33
Table 3. Correlation analysis between perceived commercialism and intimacy
Intimacy
Q22: Do you think the number of
corporate sponsors mentioned
before and after children’s
programming on PBS has
increased...stayed the same...or
decreased?
Pearson Corr.
-.057
Sig. (2-tailed)
.695
N
50
Intimacy
Q23: Do you think the connection Pearson Corr.
between characters on PBS
programs (i.e. Clifford, Arthur, etc) Sig. (2-tailed)
and commercial products (i.e. toys,
N
food, etc) has increased….stayed
the same….decreased
-.081
.570
51
Intimacy
Q24: Do you think the length of
corporate sponsor messages before
and after children’s programming
on PBS has increased….stayed the
same….or decreased?
Pearson Corr.
-.272
Sig. (2-tailed)
.053
N
51
Intimacy
Q25: Do you think the production
value (i.e. mascots, logos,
animation) of corporate messages
before and after children’s
programming on PBS has
increased….stayed the same….or
decreased?
Pearson Corr.
-.127
Sig. (2-tailed)
.375
N
51
34
Table 4. Correlation analysis between perceived commercialism and partner quality
Partner Quality
Pearson Corr.
-.051
Q22: Do you think the number of
corporate sponsors mentioned
before and after children’s
Sig. (2-tailed)
.723
programming on PBS has
increased….stayed the same….or
N
50
decreased?
Q23: Do you think the connection Pearson Corr.
between characters on PBS
programs (i.e. Clifford, Arthur, etc) Sig (2-tailed)
and commercial products (i.e. toys,
food, etc) has increased….stayed
N
the same….or decreased?
Q24: Do you think the length of
corporate sponsor messages before
and after children’s programming
on PBS has increased….stayed the
same….or decreased?
Q25: Do you think the production
value (i.e. mascots, logos,
animation) of corporate messages
before and after children’s
programming on PBS has
increased….stayed the same….or
decreased?
Partner Quality
.032
.822
51
Pearson Corr.
Partner Quality
-.146
Sig. (2-tailed)
.305
N
51
Pearson Corr.
Partner Quality
.110
Sig. (2-tailed)
.440
N
51
35
Table 5. Correlation analysis between perceived commercialism and commitment
Commitment
Q22: Do you think the number of
corporate sponsors mentioned
before and after children’s
programming on PBS has
increased….stayed the same….or
decreased?
Pearson Corr.
.114
Sig. (2-tailed)
.442
N
48
Commitment
Q23: Do you think the connection Pearson Corr.
between characters on PBS
programs (i.e. Clifford, Arthur, etc) Sig. (2-tailed)
and commercial products (i.e. toys,
food, etc) has increased….stayed
N
the same….or decreased?
.084
.571
48
Commitment
Q24: Do you think the length of
corporate sponsor messages before
and after children’s programming
on PBS has increased….stayed the
same….or decreased?
Pearson Corr.
-.047
Sig. (2-tailed)
.753
N
48
Commitment
Q25: Do you think the production
value (i.e. mascots, logos,
animation) of corporate messages
before and after children’s
programming on PBS has
increased….stayed the same….or
decreased
Pearson Corr.
-.053
Sig. (2-tailed)
.723
N
48
Additional Analysis
Exploratory research requires a complete understanding of the data; therefore
additional tests were performed to see if any interesting trends surfaced. Mean scores
were calculated for all 16 survey questions measuring relationship strength. Table 6
shows these mean values along with their standard deviations in descending order. The
high average scores across the 16 relationship questions suggests a relatively positive
attitude toward PBS among parents.
36
Table 6. Descending mean scores of the 16 relationship strength survey questions
Mean
Standard Deviation
Q10: I am likely to have my child watch children’s
5.52
2.005
programming on PBS one year from now
Q11: Overall, I am satisfied with children’s
5.34
1.911
programming on PBS
Q7: I would continue to allow my child to watch
5.29
1.684
children’s programming on PBS even if it let me
down once or twice
Q13: I am familiar with the range of children’s
5.15
1.954
programs and services PBS has to offer
Q16: I’d feel comfortable describing children’s
5.13
1.794
programming on PBS to someone who was not
familiar with it
Q6: I am very loyal to children’s programming on
5.12
2.047
PBS
Q12: PBS programming fits well with my current
4.98
1.892
stage of life
Q21: Given my impression of PBS, letting me down 4.92
1.748
would surprise me
Q18: I have become very knowledgeable about
4.56
1.500
children’s programming on PBS
Q19: PBS really understands my needs in regards to 4.48
1.820
children’s programming
Q15: I can always count on PBS to do what’s best
4.45
1.659
Q14: PBS programming makes a statement about
4.31
1.770
what’s important to me in life
Q8: Children’s programming on PBS is helping my 4.25
1.345
child better than I expected
Q17: PBS programming lets me be a part of a
4.21
1.756
community of like-minded viewers
Q20: I know I can hold PBS accountable for its
4.09
1.716
actions
Q9: I am so happy with children’s programming on
3.45
1.932
PBS I no longer look to other networks as
alternatives for my child’s television viewing
Respondents were asked several questions concerning their viewing habits and
whether or not their overall attitude toward PBS has become more positive or negative
over the years. Table 7 shows that a majority of respondents answered “often”to the
question “how often does your child watch children’s programming on PBS?” Table 8
37
shows a majority of parents answered “sometimes” to the question “how often do you
and your child watch children’s programming on PBS together?” Table 9 shows that
most people said their attitude toward PBS had “stayed the same” over the years. It is
important to note that the results of this study showed no significant relationship between
these three factors and relationship strength or perceived commercialism.
Table 7. Child viewing frequency
Frequency
Percent
Never
1
1.9
Rarely
6
11.1
Sometimes
20
37.0
Often
27
50.0
Table 8. Parent viewing frequency
Frequency
Percent
Never
2
3.7
Rarely
10
18.5
Sometimes
26
48.1
Often
16
29.6
Table 9. Frequency data of overall attitude toward PBS
Frequency
Percent
More Negative
2
3.7
Slightly More Negative
2
3.7
Stayed the Same
20
37.0
Slightly More Positive
9
16.7
More Positive
19
35.2
38
Frequency data were also collected for the four questions measuring perceived
commercialism. Tables 10-13 show that for each question pertaining to perception of
commercialism the majority of respondent’s answered “increased.”
Table 10. Frequency table for question 22: Do you think the number of corporate
sponsors mentioned before and after children’s programming on PBS has
increased….stayed the same….or decreased?
Frequency
Percent
Stayed the Same
15
27.8
Slightly Increased
10
18.5
Increased
28
51.9
Table 11. Frequency table for question 23: Do you think the connection between
characters on PBS programs (i.e. Clifford, Arthur, etc) and commercial
products (i.e. toys, food, etc) has increased….stayed the same….or decreased?
Frequency
Percent
Stayed the Same
12
22.2
Slightly Increased
5
9.3
Increased
37
68.5
Table 12. Frequency table for question 24: Do you think the length of corporate
sponsor messages before and after children’s programming on PBS has
increased….stayed the same….or decreased?
Frequency
Percent
Stayed the Same
18
33.3
Slightly Increased
11
20.4
Increased
25
46.3
39
Table 13. Frequency table for question 25: Do you think the production value (i.e.
mascots, logos, animation) of corporate messages before and after children’s
programming on PBS has increased….stayed the same….or decreased?
Frequency
Percent
Stayed the Same
10
18.5
Slightly Increased
14
25.9
Increased
30
55.6
Analysis of variance (ANOVA) is a useful statistical tool when doing exploratory
research because it allows the researcher to separate respondents into groups and
compare the average scores of different variables against chosen input factors. In this
type of analysis a large F value and a significance value approaching zero indicates a
strong possibility that the variance in the mean scores of the two groups is due to the
factor they are being compared to rather than random error.
In this study ANOVA was used to compare the means of the four questions of
perceived commercialism against the three factors of relationship strength; intimacy,
partner quality and commitment. The respondents were separated into two groups, those
who perceived a great deal of commercialism and those that did not. Respondents in the
first group answered “increased” to the perceived commercialism questions.
Respondents in the second group answered “slightly increased” or “stayed the same” to
the four questions. Tables 14-17 show the results of this analysis.
40
Table 14. Analysis of variance of the three relationship strength factors and question
22: Do you think the number of corporate sponsors mentioned before and after
children’s programming on PBS has increased….stayed the same….decreased
Intimacy
Perceive great deal of
commercialism
Do not perceive a great deal of
commercialism
Partner Quality Perceive great deal of
commercialism
Do not perceive a great deal of
commercialism
Commitment
Perceive great deal of
commercialism
Do not perceive a great deal of
commercialism
N
29
Mean
23.24
24
26.17
27
7.85
23
8.57
27
3.48
24
3.42
F
1.372
Sig.
.247
.555
.460
.014
.906
Table 15. Analysis of variance of the three relationship strength factors and question
23: Do you think the connection between characters on PBS programs (i.e.
Clifford, Arthur, etc) and commercial products (i.e. toys, food, etc) has
increased….stayed the same….decreased
Intimacy
Partner Quality
Commitment
Perceive great deal of
commercialism
Do not perceive a great deal of
commercialism
Perceive great deal of
commercialism
Do not perceive a great deal of
commercialism
Perceive a great deal of
commercialism
Do not perceive a great deal of
commercialism
N
37
Mean
23.35
17
26.18
35
7.89
16
8.75
34
3.50
17
3.35
F
1.075
Sig.
.305
.735
.395
.064
.801
41
Table 16. Analysis of variance of the three relationship strength factors and question
24: Do you think the length of corporate sponsor messages before and after
children’s programming on PBS has increased….stayed the
same….decreased
Intimacy
Perceive great deal of
commercialism
Do not perceive a great deal of
commercialism
Partner Quality Perceive great deal of
commercialism
Do not perceive a great deal of
commercialism
Commitment
Perceive great deal of
commercialism
Do not perceive a great deal of
commercialism
N
25
Mean
21.40
29
26.69
24
7.50
27
8.74
22
3.09
29
3.72
F
Sig.
4.633 .036
1.791 .187
1.353 .250
Table 17. Analysis of variance of the three relationship strength factors and question
25: Do you think the production value (i.e. mascots, logos, animation) of
corporate messages before and after children’s programming on PBS has
increased….stayed the same….decreased
Intimacy
Perceive great deal of
commercialism
Do not perceive a great deal of
commercialism
Partner Quality Perceive great deal of
commercialism
Do not perceive a great deal of
commercialism
Commitment
Perceive a great deal of
commercialism
Do not perceive a great deal of
commercialism
N
30
Mean
22.10
24
26.92
28
8.07
23
8.26
27
3.15
24
3.79
F
Sig.
3.756 .058
.040
.842
1.422 .239
The above four tables show that in two out of the 12 cases F is large and the
significance value is approaching zero. This suggests that respondents who thought
length and production value of corporate sponsor messages on PBS had increased scored
lower on the intimacy questions than those respondents who did not perceive as great an
42
increase. It is very likely that these two findings are just a coincidence considering none
of the other data support the hypothesis. However, this analysis of variance does reveal a
possible trend in the data. In 10 out of the 12 cases the mean value of the relationship
strength factors was lower for group one (perceived a great deal of commercialism) than
it was for group two (did not perceive a great deal of commercialism).
CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION
The purpose of this study was to see if there was a relationship between
perception of commercialism and strength of relationship between parents and PBS.
Therefore, the most important data to correlate was the three relationship strength factors
(intimacy, partner quality and commitment) with the four questions of perceived
commercialism. After performing the correlation it was clear that there was no
significant relationship between parents’ loyalty to PBS and their perception of
commercialism. Tables 3-5 correlated each of the three factors with each of the four
perceived commercialism questions. In all 12 cases the range of r (pearson correlation
coefficient) was between -.272 and .114. The close proximity of r to zero suggested no
correlation between the dependent and independent variables.
Since the results of the analysis did not significantly support the hypothesis
proposed in the methodology, then it can be concluded that the null hypothesis is
supported. The null hypothesis states that the relationship between parents and PBS will
be neither positively nor negatively affected by perception of commercialism. Support
for this null hypothesis was found both in the data and in relationship theory as discussed
in the literature review.
The theoretical framework section of the literature review introduced relationship
theory and how it uses the concept of interpersonal exchanges to gain a better
understanding of the relationships consumers form with the brands they use. Qualities
such as commitment and intimacy, which are important between friends, are also
43
44
important between consumers and their brands. According to relationship theory, two
factors influence the direction and stability of relational bonds. The first factor deals
with brand personality and the second factor deals with transgressional acts. With its
safe, educational, family-oriented and traditional brand image, children’s programming
on PBS definitely falls under the “sincere” brand category. In the article “When Good
Brands Do Bad” by Aaker et al. (2004), the authors refer to sincerity as the brand
personality that captures a partner’s trustworthiness and dependability, two important
qualities for relationship growth.
The article goes on to discuss the second factor of relational stability which is
transgressional acts. Relationship theory suggests that sincere brands have a distinct
advantage over other brand images to counteract acts of transgression. “Of particular
note is the relationship context in which transgression is committed, such that
relationship-serving biases dilute the negative effects of transgressions in strong unions
and past positives cancel them in the long-standing relations” (Aaker et al., 2004, p.3). In
the case of children’s programming on PBS, relationship-serving biases would be its
award-winning, high quality, educational programming. Therefore, if perceived
commercialism were considered an act of transgression, then relationship theory suggests
these biases, combined with the brands sincere image, would dilute any negative effects
brought about by this transgressional act.
This explains why the average relationship strength scores for respondents with
extremely high perceptions of commercialism were not significantly smaller than those
respondents with less perception of commercialism. Even though the data supported the
null hypothesis and relationship theory lent reasoning to why strong brand images can
withstand seemingly negative acts of transgression, it was still beneficial to examine the
data from multiple angles.
45
The descriptive statistics run on the demographic data and the questions not related
to the two instruments that measured the independent and dependent variables helped
paint a better picture of the sampled respondents. The sample was composed of
predominantly white, middle to upper class women between the ages of 35 and 44
(Figures 2-5). Looking at frequency tables 7-9 it was clear that the majority of
respondents had children who “often” watched children’s programming on PBS. Also, a
majority of respondents “sometimes” watched the PBS programming with their children
and believed their overall attitude toward PBS had “stayed the same” over the years.
The most interesting part of the “Additional Analysis” section in the results chapter
was the ANOVA results. Even though results were not significant, some trends emerged
that moved in the expected direction of the hypothesis. Tables 14-17 compare the means
of the three relationship strength factors against the scale that measured for level of
perceived commercialism. The data revealed that the average intimacy factor score for
respondents who answered “increased” on the four perceived commercialism questions
was almost always greater than for respondents who answered “slightly increased” or
“stayed the same.”
On one particular survey a parent made an interesting comment that might shed
light on why perception of commercialism may affect relationship strength with PBS.
“As a conservative I haven’t been as interested in supporting PBS and I certainly don’t
like the commercialization of all its programming. Our children have been trained to turn
off commercials (It’s a family rule!), but sponsorships may not trigger the rule because
they don’t fit as a typical commercial.” This respondent marked “increased” for all four
questions related to perceived commercialism and her average score for the 16
relationship strength questions was a 2.6 out of a possible 7. This is a very low score and
suggests a negative relationship with PBS. Looking at this survey alone it would seem
46
that the issue of commercialism is rather simple. If you are dissatisfied with the way PBS
has loosened the rules surrounding corporate sponsor messages, then your relationship
with PBS suffers. However, the lack of any significant correlation between perceived
commercialism and the strength of the PBS/parent relationship suggests otherwise.
A second respondent wrote this comment at the end of his survey; “I think PBS has
gotten FAR more commercial than it used to be. I am not at all happy about this, but
PBS is still light years better than any other station, especially for children…and adults.”
Similar to the previously mentioned respondent, this man marked all four perceived
commercialism questions as “increased.” However; his average score for the 16
relationship strength questions was a 5.9 out of a possible 7.
Even though these two responses differ greatly, relationship theory is still
supported in both. For the first respondent it seemed that PBS’ brand qualities were not
enough to negate the detrimental effects of increased commercialism on noncommercial
public broadcasting. Research in relationship theory has shown that once transgressions
start affecting consumer perception of brand image, it is extremely difficult to slow the
relationship decline (Aaker et al., (2004). However, for the second respondent it seemed
his relationship with PBS was strong enough to overlook the increased number, length
and production value of underwriter acknowledgments. He knew children’s
programming on PBS was better than what he could find anywhere else and therefore let
the one downfall of increased commercialism slide as a result of his perception of other
positive brand qualitites.
The lack of any significant findings throughout the data analysis was due in large
part to the limitations of the study. The combined random and convenience sampling
methods used to collect the data dismiss this study from being generalized to any
population. Insufficient sample size and lack of diversity among participants may have
47
contributed to the limited range of responses. The frequency results of the demographic
data demonstrate a high concentration of white, middle to upper class women as the
sample base. The predominance of women is due in large part to the fact that women are
usually the child caretakers of the family. Since the majority of the surveys were handed
out to the person responsible for picking up the children from day care or nursery school,
it was not surprising that most respondents were female.
It is also possible that the two instruments used to measure the dependent and
independent variables were not sensitive enough to collect the desired information. For
example, in one respondent’s comments at the end of the survey he wrote, “I don’t know
if you will get this from your survey, but I think PBS has gotten FAR more
commercial…” This type of comment suggests that the survey may not have asked the
right questions in regards to how parents felt about PBS in light of increased
commercialization. However, it could also mean that the data collected from the survey
supports the null hypothesis and no matter how much the people believe commercialism
on PBS has increased, they still have a strong positive view of the network because of the
quality of children’s programming and its continued distinctiveness from all other
commercial networks.
CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSION
If anything is to be taken away from this research, it is that parents are well aware
of the transformation PBS has undergone with respect to its increased amounts of
commercialization. They have noticed the changes in the number, length and production
value of corporate underwriter messages. They have seen corporate tie-ins at the grocery
store such as Clifford the Big Red Dog and Lipton Soup and at the toy store with the
limitless selection of Tickle-Me-Elmo dolls, Barney pajamas and Arthur lunch boxes.
However, despite this awareness, parents have been relatively unaffected by it.
Therefore, the results of this study support both the null hypothesis and the basic
assumptions of relationship theory.
Only four out of the 52 respondents who answered the question of whether or not
their overall attitude toward PBS had become more “positive,” “slightly more positive,”
“stayed the same,” “slightly more negative” or more “negative,” placed a mark lower
than “stayed the same.” This means the rest of the respondents’ answers ranged between
“stayed the same” and more “positive.” This result is not at all surprising. Historically,
children’s programming on PBS has been highly praised for its involvement in child
development and education. Clifford the Big Red Dog, Dragon Tales and Arthur are the
top three programs among kids two to five. Barney and Caillou also rank in the top 10
which gives PBS KIDS five of the top 10 programs among preschoolers. PBS children’s
programs have also won more prestigious awards than any other network (“PBS KIDS”,
2004, para 3-4). As long as parents see quality children’s programming and a distinction
48
49
between public television and its commercial alternatives, their relationship with the
network will stay in tact.
None of the results in this study may have been significant, but the trends alluded to
in the analysis of variance pose interesting questions and possibilities for future research.
Respondents belonging to the “perceived a great deal of commercialism” group scored
consistently lower across the three relationship strength factors than those respondents
belonging to the “did not perceive a great deal of commercialism” group. Conducting
future research over a long period of time (10 years) using a trend analysis technique
would be very useful in determining whether or not perceived commercialism will
actually have an effect on the strength of relationship between PBS and parents of child
viewers in the long term.
A point in time “snap shot” analysis such as this study lacks the ability to evaluate
change in attitude over time. It is possible that parents may be accepting of certain forms
of commercialism on PBS now, but a few years down the road things could be very
different. Even though the digital transition is still in its initial stages, the FCC has
already approved a plan to allow public television stations to run commercials on some of
the new channels they will obtain post digital conversion (Spivack, 2001). Today, parents
see underwriter acknowledgments whose similarities with real commercials are
increasing. Tomorrow, they may be tuned in to one of PBS’ supplementary channels on
its digital spectrum and see full blown advertisements targeting their children. How will
this new development affect the PBS/parent relationship? An in-depth trend analysis
would be able to assess this type of evolution. Future research could establish how
parents actually feel toward commercialism on PBS, not just if commercialism has
increased or not. Relationship theory could really be put to the test by tracking a strong
50
brand image (PBS) and an act of transgression (commercialism on a noncommercial
network) over time.
In the book Public Broadcasting and the Public Interest, William Hoynes (2003)
believes PBS is treading on thin ice with its commercialized branding effort.
As PBS becomes more integrated into the commercial media system and develops a
business model that sees public television as an increasingly commercial enterprise,
the foundations of the public service model are deteriorating. Indeed, the branding
strategy is an attempt to turn the cultural value of the old PBS into financial value
for the new PBS. This exchange is a means of transforming public service, and the
trust that accompanies such public service, into a marketable commodity. In the
midst of this transformation, PBS runs the very real risk that its aggressive branding
strategy will undermine the trust and loyalty that makes its brand so valuable. (p.50)
The results of this study may not confirm an erosion of goodwill toward PBS due to
increased commercialism, but that does not mean the future of public television is stable.
If PBS fails to reevaluate its aggressive branding strategy, then it may begin to alienate the
very public it is meant to serve. Media enterprises are standing upon the threshold of a
new digital era that promises infinite opportunities. How well will PBS be able to
compete in this multi-media environment if they squander away the one thing that
distinguishes them from the crowd? Future research, including content analysis, focus
groups and surveys, may be able to answer this question. The only problem is by the time
the question is answered, it may be too late to salvage public television’s original public
service mission from the clutches of its newly adopted market-driven business model.
APPENDIX A
SURVEY
Please answer the following questions:
1. How many children do you have? ____
2. Please list the age(s) of your children: ____
____
____
____
____
3. How often do your children watch children’s programming on PBS?
Often Sometimes Rarely Never
(4)
(3)
(2)
(1)
4. How often do you watch children’s programming on PBS with your children?
Often Sometimes Rarely Never
(4)
(3)
(2)
(1)
5. Given your experience with children’s programming on PBS as a child and a parent,
has your attitude toward the network become more...
______
______
______
______
______
Positive
Stayed the Same
Negative
(5)
(4)
(3)
(2)
(1)
Based on your experiences growing up with children’s programming on PBS and then
watching PBS programs with your children, please rate the following:
(Circle one number for each question, where 1=strongly disagree, 7=strongly agree and
9=unable to rate)
6. I am very loyal to children’s programming on PBS. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9
7. I would continue to allow my child to watch
children’s programming on PBS even if it let me
down once or twice.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9
8. Children’s programming on PBS is helping my
child better than I expected.
9
51
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
52
9. I am so happy with children’s programming on
PBS I no longer look to other networks as
alternatives for my child’s television viewing.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9
10. I am likely to have my child watch children’s
programming on PBS one year from now.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9
11. Overall, I am satisfied with children’s
programming on PBS.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9
12. PBS programming fits well with my current stage of
life.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9
13. I am familiar with the range of children’s programs
and services PBS has to offer.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9
14. PBS programming makes a statement about what’s
important to me in life.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9
15. I can always count on PBS to do what’s best.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9
16. I’d feel comfortable describing children’s
programming on PBS to someone who was not
familiar with it.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9
17. PBS programming lets me be a part of a
community of like-minded viewers.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9
18. I have become very knowledgeable about children’s
programming on PBS.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9
19. PBS really understands my needs in regards to
children’s programming.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9
20. I know I can hold PBS accountable for its actions. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
9
21. Given my impression of PBS, letting me down
would surprise me.
9
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
53
Place an X above the line that best corresponds to your answer.
Given your experience with children’s programming on PBS as a child and now years
later as a parent,
22. Do you think the number of corporate sponsors mentioned before and after children’s
programs has:
______
______
______
______
______
Increased
Stayed the Same
Decreased
(5)
(4)
(3)
(2)
(1)
23. Do you think the connection between characters on PBS programs (i.e. Clifford,
Arthur etc.) and commercial products (i.e. toys, food etc.) has:
______
______
______
______
______
Increased
Stayed the Same
Decreased
(5)
(4)
(3)
(2)
(1)
24. Do you think the length of corporate sponsor messages before and after children’s
programs has:
______
______
______
______
______
Increased
Stayed the Same
Decreased
(5)
(4)
(3)
(2)
(1)
25. Do you think the production value (i.e. mascots, logos, animation) of corporate
sponsor messages before and after children’s programs has:
______
______
______
______
______
Increased
Stayed the Same
Decreased
(5)
(4)
(3)
(2)
(1)
Please fill out the following demographic information:
26. What is your gender?
1. Male
2. Female
27. Please mark your ethnic background:
1. American Indian, Eskimo, or Aleut
2. Asian or Pacific Islander
3. Black, not Hispanic
4. Hispanic, of any race
5. White, not Hispanic
6. Other ___________
54
28. Please mark your age range:
1. 18-24
4. 45-54
2. 25-34
5. 55-64
3. 35-44
6. 65+
29. Please mark the range that best matches your family’s current income:
1. $0-24,999
5. $100,000-124,999
2. $25,000-49,999
6. $125,000-149,999
3. $50,000-74,999
7. $150,000-174,999
4. $75,000-99,999
8. $175,000+
Thank you for filling out this survey!
APPENDIX B
ORIGINAL SCALE OF RELATIONSHIP STRENGTH INDICATORS
Relationship
Strength
Indicators
Commitment
Items
I am very loyal to Captura
I am willing to make small sacrifices in order to keep using Captura
I would be willing to postpone my purchase if the Captura site was
temporarily unavailable
I would stick with Captura even if it let me down once or twice
I am so happy with Captura that I no longer feel the need to watch
out for other photography alternatives
I am likely to be using Captura one year from now
Intimacy
I would feel comfortable sharing detailed personal info about myself
with Captura
Captura really understands my needs in the photographic services
I’d fell comfortable describing Captura to someone who was not
familiar with it
I am familiar with the range of products and services Captura offers
I have become very knowledgeable about Captura
Satisfaction
I am completely satisfied with Captura
I am completely pleased with Captura
Captura is turning out better than I expected
Self-Connection
The Captura brand connects with the part of me that really makes me
tick
The Captura brand fits well with my current stage of life
55
56
Relationship
Strength
Indicators
Self-Connection
Items
The Captura brand says a lot about the kind of person I would like
to be
Using Captura lets me be a part of a shared community of likeminded consumers
The Captura brand makes a statement about what’s important to me
in life
Partner Quality
I can always count on Captura to do what’s best
If Captura makes a mistake, it will try its best to make up for it
I know I can hold Captura accountable for its actions
Captura is reliable
Given my image of Captura, letting me down would surprise me
A brand failure would be inconsistent with my expectations
Source: Aaker, J., Fournier, S., Brasel, A. (2004). W hen Good Brands Do Bad. Journal of Consumer
Research, 31(1), 1-16.
REFERENCES
Aaker, J. (1997). Dimensions of Brand Personality. Journal of Marketing Research,
34(August), 347-357.
Aaker, J., Fournier, S., Brasel, A. (2004). When Good Brands Do Bad. Journal of
Consumer Research, 31(1), 1-16.
Auletta, K. (2004). Big Bird Flies Right [Electronic Version]. The New Yorker, p.42,
6/7/04.
Behrens, S. (1995). Hill chairmen cast themselves as problem solvers. Current. Retrieved
November 15, 2004, from www.current.org/mo517.html.
Bouton, H. (1995). Commercials: Divided views on fundamental question. Current.
Retrieved November 15, 2004, from www.current.org/cm/cm508b.html.
Brown, D. (1991). Human Universals. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Brown, W. (2002) Ethics and the Business of Children’s Public Television Programming.
Journal of Business Ethics, 6(1), 73-81.
Carnegie Commission on Educational Television. 1967. Public Television: A Program for
Action. New York: Bantam.
Cook, J. (2003). Advertising on Public Television: A Look at PBS. In M. McCauley, E.
Peterson, B. Artz & D. Halleck (eds.), Public Broadcasting and the Public Interest.
(p. 85-94). New York: M.E. Sharpe.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. & Beattie, O. (1979). Life Themes: Theoretical and Empirical
Exploration of Their Origins and Effects. Journal of Psychology, 19(Winter), 45-63.
Eggerton, J. (2004). In PBS we trust, according to PBS survey. Broadcasting and Cable.
Retrieved October 5, 2004, from
www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA380454.html?display=Search+Results&text
=pbs.
Egner, J. (2004). PBS execs seek to lower bar for 30-second spots. Current. Retrieved
October 5, 2004, from www.current.org/cm/cm0418thirty.shtml.
FAIR. (2000). Commercialization of Children’s Public Television. Retrieved
September 20, 2004, from www.fair.org/activism/pbs-kids.html.
57
58
Fehr, B. & Russell, J. (1991). The Concept of Love Viewed from a Prototype Perspective.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60(March), 425-438.
Fournier, S. (1998). Consumers and Their Brands: Developing Relationship Theory in
Consumer Research. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(March), 343-373.
Gordon, D. et al. (n.d.) Controversies in Media Ethics. New York: Longman, Inc.
Guterman, J. (2003). Killing a brand, the PBS way public broadcasting lost its monopoly
on the children’s market. Media Notes. Retrieved October 5, 2004, from
www.business2.com/b2/web/articles/0,17863,515344,00.html.
Hoynes, W. (2003). The PBS Brand and the Merchandising of Public Service. In M.
McCauley, E. Peterson, B. Artz & D. Halleck (eds.), Public Broadcasting and the
Public Interest. (p. 41-51). New York: M.E. Sharpe.
Klinger, E. (1987). Current Concerns and Disengagement from Incentives. In F. Halish &
J. Kuhl (eds.), Motivation, Invention and Volition. (p.337-347). New York:
Springer.
Ledbetter, J. (1997). Made Possible By…The Death of Public Broadcasting in the United
States. London: Verso.
Levinger, G. (1983). Development and Change. Close Relationships. Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Maxham, J. & Netemeyer, R. (2002). A Longitudinal Study of Complaining Customers’
Evaluations of multiple Service Failures and Recovery Efforts. Journal of
Marketing, 66(October), 57-72.
McConnell, B. (2004). A $5 billion proposal. Broadcasting and Cable. Retrieved
October 15, 2004, from
www.broadcastingcable.com/article/CA425964.html?display=Search+Results&text
=pbs.
McGuinn, D. (2002). Coping with Arthur-itis: The predominance of cartoons in PBS
programming for kids may be economical and entertaining, but is it educational?
Boston Globe Magazine, 10/6/02.
Metts, S. (1994). Relational Transgressions. In Cupach, W. & Spitzberg, B. (eds.), The
Dark Side of Interpersonal Communications. (p.217-239). New Jersey: Erlbaum.
Paradise, A. (2004). No longer a word from your sponsor: The increasing presence and
power of corporate sponsorship on PBS KIDS television. Kaleidoscope: A Graduate
Journal of Qualitative Communication Research, Vol. 3, 30-50. Retrieved
December 3, 2004, from www.siu.edu/~sco/vol_3_no_1.pdf.
PBS KIDS Backgrounder & Facts. (2005). Retrieved April 10, 2005, from
www.pbs.org/aboutpbs/aboutpbs_corp_pbskids.html.
59
PBS KIDS #1 Children’s Media Brand. (2002). Retrieved November 4, 2004, from
www.pbs.org/aboutpbs/news/20021022_kidsbrandcampaign.html.
Redmont, B. (2000). Public Television and the Camel’s Nose. Television Quarterly,
31(1), 27-32.
Rowland, W. (2003). We take another step in a seductive dance with commerce. Current.
Retrieved November 11, 2004, from www.current.org/cm/cm0303rowland.html.
Should public broadcasting go more commercial? (2002). Current. Retrieved
11, 2004, from www.current.org/cm/cm1.html.
November
Singh, S. (2000). The Camel and the Arab. Retrieved November 15, 2004, from
www.boloji.com/natkhat/025.htm.
Spivack, A. (2001). FCC clarifies rules for noncommercial television stations’ use of
digital television channel capacity. FCC News Release. Retrieved October 28, 2004,
from www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Mass_Media/News_Releases/2001/nrmm0111.html .
Welcome. (n.d.). Retrieved November 4, 2004, from www.pbs.org/aboutpbs/.
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
Christina Regan graduated from Boston College in 2003 and received her bachelor’s
degree in mass communications. At Boston she was captain of the Women’s Track &
Field team and was pleased to be accepted onto the track team at the University of Florida
upon her arrival in August 2003. After completion of her degree of master of arts in mass
communication at Florida, Christina plans on moving back home to Boston where she will
pursue a career in children’s public television production.
60