Comparison of Media Company Performance Efficiency Based on the Search Engine’s Method of Providing News Content (External Links vs. Internal Links)
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Please more detail describes data collection, and explain more focus the significant finding.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Please find attaching revision note.
Thank you.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
- It should be more suitable if this paper was submitted in marketing or business areas.
- In technical manner, SFA and MFA are not the novel idea. Thus, the application of them should be the important part. However, many parts are not cleared.
1. You get data from a web portal (search engine) that has 63 media companies. Can you ensure that only one web portal can be used to analysis the effect of internal and external links? Or, is it possible if web portal characteristics (such as style, algorithms, policies) will be affect to media companies?
2. In Table 1, the authors show some statistical values. The standard deviations are higher than the total values, this should not be occurred. Thus, this part must be clarified.
3. For the number of observations in Table 1, is it same to the number of media contents? For 8 years, 123 companies, are there around 500 contents? In average, there are around 5 contents from each company in 8 years, this number is rather small.
4. How to use SFA and MFA in your analysis? What are the values Xi in your analysis? Which factors that you are considering in your analysis? Are they cover all related information? Do they affect to the performance of internal and external links?
5. Do you have any ethical concern for 123 companies?
6. Do the types of contents, categories, length, mood and tone affect to the efficiency be considered? The efficiencies not be affected by only the types of links.
- I cannot find Ref. [57] in the context of this paper.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Please find attaching revision note.
Thank you.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 3 Report
Overall the paper is adequate and the research question is clearly stated. Some suggestions/questions:
- The meaning of the variable L in (8) and (9) are not explained, it seems like the variable being optimized is beta_hat, but on the left hand side the optimal value is L, please clarity this point
- It seems that the TE values reported in the conclusion: 0.7226 for the internal group and 0.6782 do not appear in Table 3. But the values for MTR in the conclusion do appear in Table 3, please check if it is not a mistake.
Author Response
Dear reviewer,
Please find attaching revision note.
Thank you.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 4 Report
The subject of the paper fits well to the scope of the journal. The results listed in the paper seems to be true and correct. The paper is well written and it is written in a well defined manner. I think it needs to be published in your esteem journal.
Reviewer 5 Report
The authors have a deep understanding of the literature in the field of HCI and systematically state Based on the Search Engine's Method of Providing News Content.
I think the current content in the manuscript can be accepted, but it would be better if newer literature could be added.
Also the English writing could be improved.
