THE ROLE OF THE MEDIA IN THE INTERNET IPO BUBBLE Abstract The first part of this paper explores whether aggregate media coverage was different for internet IPOs as opposed to a matching sample of non-internet IPOs in the late 1990s. So we read all news items that came out between 1996 through 2000 on 458 internet IPOs and a matching sample of 458 non-internet IPOs-a total of 171, 488 news items-and classify each news item as good news, neutral news or bad news. We find, not surprisingly, that the overall media coverage was more intense for internet IPOs. Further. we document that the overall media coverage was much more positive for internet IPOs in the period of dramatic rise in share prices and was mucl more negative for internet IPOs in the period of dramatic fall in share prices. The second part of the paper explores whether this differential media coverage had any effect on the difference in risk-adjusted returns between internet stocks and non-internet stocks. We find, surprisingly, that the answer is no the market somewhat discounted the media sentiment -though net news (number of good news minus number of bad news) Granger caused risk-adjusted returns for both samples of IPOs, the effect was lower for internet IPOs, especially in the bubble period. So our conclusion is that the media was not a significant factor in the dramatic rise and fall of internet shares in the late 1990sTHE ROLE OF THE MEDIA IN THE INTERNET IPO BUBBLE Abstract The first part of this paper explores whether aggregate media coverage was different for internet IPOs as opposed to a matching sample of non-internet IPOs in the late 1990s. So we read all news items that came out between 1996 through 2000 on 458 internet IPOs and a matching sample of 458 non-internet IPOs – a total of 171,488 news items – and classify each news item as good news, neutral news or bad news. We find, not surprisingly, that the overall media coverage was more intense for internet IPOs. Further, we document that the overall media coverage was much more positive for internet IPOs in the period of dramatic rise in share prices and was much more negative for internet IPOs in the period of dramatic fall in share prices. The second part of the paper explores whether this differential media coverage had any effect on the difference in risk-adjusted returns between internet stocks and non-internet stocks. We find, surprisingly, that the answer is no: the market somewhat discounted the media sentiment – though net news (number of good news minus number of bad news) Granger caused risk-adjusted returns for both samples of IPOs, the effect was lower for internet IPOs, especially in the bubble period. So our conclusion is that the media was not a significant factor in the dramatic rise and fall of internet shares in the late 1990s