Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assessing Media Pluralism in the Digital Age

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Book cover Internet Science (INSCI 2016)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 9934))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 1794 Accesses

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to discuss challenges of measuring media pluralism and freedom in the digital age. We do this while presenting the updates of Media Pluralism Monitor implemented by the Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom in three consecutive cycles (2014, 2015 and 2016). The paper explores methodological limitations and other pressing issues in regard to optimal assessment of risks to media pluralism in the digital environment.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    http://monitor.cmpf.eui.eu/.

  2. 2.

    Media Pluralism Monitor (MPM) was originally developed by the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven – ICRI, Central European University – CMCS and Jönköping International Business School – MMTC, together with a consultancy firm, Ernst & Young Belgium and subcontractors in all Member States. Subsequently, the European Commission has awarded several grants to the Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom to conduct pilot implementations of the MPM.

  3. 3.

    In 2014, the Monitor assessed the following nine countries: Belgium, Bulgaria, Denmark, Estonia, France, Greece, Hungary, Italy and the UK. In 2015, 19 EU countries that were not covered during the first pilot phase in 2014 were assessed: Austria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech republic, Finland, Germany, Ireland, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain and Sweden. http://monitor.cmpf.eui.eu/mpm2015/results/#download.

  4. 4.

    Most of the Internet access, coverage and usage variables rely on statistics from Eurostat.

  5. 5.

    Akamai’s connection speed measures how quickly (in kilobits per second) data can be transferred from the Internet to a local computer. The data averages all of the connection speeds calculated over a period of time from the unique IP addresses determined to be in a specific country. Faris and Heacock Jones (2013) suggest that the sampling structure of Akamai’s data, based on a large proportion of Internet connections, has a more reliable measurement of speeds. Akamai source: https://www.akamai.com/us/en/our-thinking/state-of-the-Internet-report/.

  6. 6.

    https://www.akamai.com/us/en/our-thinking/state-of-the-Internet-report/.

References

  • Braman, S.: Where has media policy gone? Defining the field in the twenty-first century. Commun. Law Policy 9(2), 153–182 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Belli, L., De Filippi, P.: Net Neutrality Compendium. Human Rights Free Competition and the Future of the Internet. Springer, Switzerland (2016)

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Breindl, J.: Internet content regulation in liberal democracies. A literature review. Working Papers Digital Humanities 2. Göttingen Centre for Digital Humanities (2013). http://www.gcdh.de/files/1113/6549/2342/YBreindl_Literature_Review_Mar2013_final.pdf

  • Celot, P.: Assessing media literacy levels in Europe and the EC pilot initiative. In: EAVI (2015). http://www.eavi.eu/joomla/images/stories/About_EAVI/assessing.pdf

  • Craufurd Smith, R., Tambini, D., Morisi, D.: Regulating media plurality and media power in the 21st century. In: Broughton Micova, S., Tambini, D. (eds.) LSE Media Policy Project Series, Media Policy Brief 7. The London School of Economics and Political Science, London (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  • Eurostat: Individual’s level of digital skills [isoc_sk_dskl_i] (2015). http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/data/database?node_code=isoc_sk_dskl_i

  • Faris R., Heacock Jones R.: Measuring Internet Activity: A (Selective) Review of Methods and Metrics. Harvard University - Berkman Center for Internet & Society (2013). http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2353457

  • Henrichsen, J.R., Betz, M., Lisosky, L.M.: Building Digital Safety for Journalists: A Survey of Selected Issues. Unesco Series on Internet Freedom. UNESCO, Paris (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  • Karppinen, K.: Rethinking media pluralism and communicative abundance. Observatorio J. 11, 151–169 (2009)

    Google Scholar 

  • Krueger, C.C, Swatman, P.M.C.: Who are the internet content providers? Identifying a realistic taxonomy of content providers in the online news sector. In: The Proceedings of IFIP I3E, Sao Paolo, Brazil (2003). http://www.cimne.com/simweb/formacion/ifipi3e.pdf

  • Murdoch, S.J., Anderson, R.: Tools and technologies of internet filtering. In: Ronald, J.D., Palfrey, J.G., Rohozinski, R., Zittrain, J. (eds.) Access Denied: The Practice and Policy of Global Internet Filtering. MIT Press, Cambridge (2008)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Media Pluralism and Media Freedom (CMPF), European University Institute, Florence, Italy

    Iva Nenadic & Alina Ostling

Authors
  1. Iva Nenadic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Alina Ostling
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Iva Nenadic .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Florence, Florence, Italy

    Franco Bagnoli

  2. Center for Research and Technology, Thessaloniki, Greece

    Anna Satsiou

  3. National and Kapodistrian University, Athens, Greece

    Ioannis Stavrakakis

  4. University of Florence, Florence, Italy

    Paolo Nesi

  5. University of Florence, Florence, Italy

    Giovanna Pacini

  6. University of Zurich, Zürich, Switzerland

    Yanina Welp

  7. University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom

    Thanassis Tiropanis

  8. University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom

    Dominic DiFranzo

Appendix

Appendix

1.1 The MPM2016 Variables Focusing on the Digital Aspects of Media Pluralism

Basic protection

10. Are restrictions upon freedom of expression online clearly defined in law in accordance with international and regional human rights standards?

11. Are the restrictions to freedom of expression online ‘proportionate’ to the legitimate aim pursued’?

12. Does the state generally refrain from filtering and/or monitoring and/or blocking and/or removing online content in an arbitrary way?

13. Do the ISPs generally refrain from filtering and/or monitoring and/or blocking and/or removing online content in an arbitrary way?

29. Are there threats to the digital safety of journalists?

47. What percentage of the population is covered by broadband?

48. What percentage of the rural population is covered by broadband?

49. What is the percentage of broadband subscription in your country?

50. What is the average Internet connection speed in your country?

51. What is the percentage of market shares of the TOP 4 ISPs in your country?

52. Are there regulatory safeguards regarding net neutrality in your country?

Market Plurality

84. What is the market share of the Top4 Internet content providers?

85. What is the audience concentration for Internet content providers in your country?

105. Has expenditure for online advertising increased over the past two years?

107. Has the number of individuals regularly using the Internet increased over the past two years?

108. Has the number of individuals using mobile devices to access Internet on the move increased over the past two years?

Social Inclusiveness

143. What is the percentage of population that has at least basic digital usage skills?

144. What is the percentage of population that has at least basic digital communication skills?

Political Independence

166. (165. Are there self-regulatory measures that stipulate editorial independence in the news media?) Do these self-regulatory measures consider online news media?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2016 Springer International Publishing AG

About this paper

Cite this paper

Nenadic, I., Ostling, A. (2016). Assessing Media Pluralism in the Digital Age. In: Bagnoli, F., et al. Internet Science. INSCI 2016. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 9934. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45982-0_20

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-45982-0_20

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-45981-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-45982-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation