Currently submitted to: Journal of Medical Internet Research
Date Submitted: Dec 25, 2025
Open Peer Review Period: Dec 25, 2025 - Feb 19, 2026
(closed for review but you can still tweet)
NOTE: This is an unreviewed Preprint
Warning: This is a unreviewed preprint (What is a preprint?). Readers are warned that the document has not been peer-reviewed by expert/patient reviewers or an academic editor, may contain misleading claims, and is likely to undergo changes before final publication, if accepted, or may have been rejected/withdrawn (a note "no longer under consideration" will appear above).
Peer review me: Readers with interest and expertise are encouraged to sign up as peer-reviewer, if the paper is within an open peer-review period (in this case, a "Peer Review Me" button to sign up as reviewer is displayed above). All preprints currently open for review are listed here. Outside of the formal open peer-review period we encourage you to tweet about the preprint.
Citation: Please cite this preprint only for review purposes or for grant applications and CVs (if you are the author).
Final version: If our system detects a final peer-reviewed "version of record" (VoR) published in any journal, a link to that VoR will appear below. Readers are then encourage to cite the VoR instead of this preprint.
Settings: If you are the author, you can login and change the preprint display settings, but the preprint URL/DOI is supposed to be stable and citable, so it should not be removed once posted.
Submit: To post your own preprint, simply submit to any JMIR journal, and choose the appropriate settings to expose your submitted version as preprint.
Warning: This is an author submission that is not peer-reviewed or edited. Preprints - unless they show as "accepted" - should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information.
Commercialization of Online Cancer Information in South Korea: Examining Covert Promotional Cancer-related Posts Across Two Major Search Engines
ABSTRACT
Background:
Internet search engines serve as primary gateways for cancer information, yet the commercialization of health content within organic search results remains understudied. While covert promotional content—such as native advertising and stealth marketing—has been documented in various contexts, systematic comparisons across structurally divergent search platforms are lacking.
Objective:
This study examined the prevalence, distribution, and information quality characteristics of covert promotional cancer-related content across Naver and Google, South Korea's two dominant search engines, which have fundamentally different platform architectures.
Methods:
A two-phase cross-sectional content analysis was conducted. Phase 1 employed natural language processing to identify 33 cancer-related keywords from 1,400 preliminary posts. Phase 2 systematically collected 5,848 posts in October 2023, yielding 919 unique posts (598 from Naver and 321 from Google) that covered seven major cancer types, representing over 70% of Korean cancer incidence. Two trained coders analyzed promotional status, intensity, institutional sources, and information quality indicators (citation practices, information depth, and source attribution), with inter-coder reliability exceeding κ=.80. Chi-square tests examined the associations between platform and cancer type.
Results:
Covert promotional content appeared in 48.6% (447/919) of analyzed posts, with significantly higher prevalence on Google (54.2%, 174/321) than Naver (45.7%, 273/598; χ²₁=5.78, p=.016). Platform differences were pronounced: Naver promotional posts predominantly originated from blogs (96.0%, 262/273) and exhibited full promotional intensity (52.1%, 126/242), while Google posts primarily came from hospital websites (81.0%, 141/174) with simple institutional identification (57.8%, 52/90). Institutional source distribution varied significantly by platform (χ²₅=215.714, P<.001): traditional medicine institutions dominated Naver (99.2%, 119/120), whereas university-affiliated hospitals predominated on Google (85.0%, 96/113). Information quality differed substantially: indirect citation was more common on Google (81.6%, 142/174) than Naver (58.6%, 160/273; χ²₁=25.653, P<.001), while comparative informational depth was higher on Google (55.7%, 97/174) versus Naver (19.4%, 53/273; χ²₂=64.683, P<.001).
Conclusions:
Covert promotional cancer content is pervasive in Korean search results, with platform architecture systematically shaping promotional patterns, institutional sources, and information quality rather than reflecting deliberate marketing strategies. These findings underscore the need for platform-sensitive regulation and enhanced digital health literacy to protect vulnerable cancer information seekers from commercial exploitation embedded within ostensibly neutral search environments.
Citation
Request queued. Please wait while the file is being generated. It may take some time.
Copyright
© The authors. All rights reserved. This is a privileged document currently under peer-review/community review (or an accepted/rejected manuscript). Authors have provided JMIR Publications with an exclusive license to publish this preprint on it's website for review and ahead-of-print citation purposes only. While the final peer-reviewed paper may be licensed under a cc-by license on publication, at this stage authors and publisher expressively prohibit redistribution of this draft paper other than for review purposes.