The three primary concerns discussed in chapter 1 overlap in recommending ownership dispersal. Each, however, rested on a somewhat different goal or value relating to an ideal communications order. No matter how dispersed media ownership is, this dispersal will not fully achieve any of these three goals – it only contributes to their realization. This fact means that fully serving these goals requires additional policy measures. The policy measures advocated above also are not, to say the least, likely to be fully adopted. These facts suggest considering whether alternative policies can advance the three goals outlined. Alternatives would probably contribute differently to each of the three values. Possibly the best way to explore the wisdom of additional policies is separately to examine responses to each value. Cursory initial remarks about that project can serve as a conclusion to this book.

A MORE DEMOCRATIC DISTRIBUTION OF COMMUNICATIVE POWER

This goal is inclusionary: everyone should be able to experience some significant media as in some sense “theirs” and not experience their media interests as marginalized. It also is to some extent participatory. The goal aims at more and more fairly distributed opportunities to participate in the public sphere. As chapter 1 emphasized, these aims do not mean or require an absolutely egalitarian distribution. A strict egalitarian ambition is inconsistent with the appropriate existence of opinion leaders and with the very idea of “mass” media.