Update and pilot implementation of the media pluralism monitor (MPM2014): Conclusions and recommendations for future implementations Principles of simplification http://monitor.cmpf.eui.eu/

1. UPDATE AND PILOT IMPLEMENTATION OF THE MEDIA PLURALISM MONITOR
(MPM2014): CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE
IMPLEMENTATIONS
Principles of simplification
Elda Brogi
Centre for Media Pluralism & Media Freedom | Florence – 30.Sept.2014

2. Media Pluralism Monitor
Pilot test implementation 2013-2014
Structure of the MPM (Ver. 2009)
• 166 indicators
• 6 risk domains
• 43 different sub-risks
• three different types: legal, economic and socio-demographic
• Supply, distribution, use.
• Holistic approach. Quantitative and qualitative indicators and analysis

3. Challenges of the MPM (Ver. 2009)
• the MPM is a very challenging instrument that collects and
elaborates in a systematic way the most important aspects
covered by renowned international and European studies
on media pluralism, and even builds up beyond them.
• Need to give effective implementation in the pilot project
limited time-framework.
• the instrument was preliminary simplified and streamlined.

4. Update and enhancement
• Applicability: some indicators were particularly complex, time and money consuming, especially taking into
account timeframe and budgetary limitations of the pilot experimental project;
• Relevance: the scope of the initially projected application of the MPM was considered to be too wide.
Number of indicators addressed issues that may not be part of a truly operational definition of media
pluralism. Other indicators tackled information that is only indirectly related to the goal of media freedom and
pluralism to guarantee and facilitate the presence of well- informed citizens in relevant current and political
affairs and public debates;
• Measurability of indicators: several indicators appeared too difficult as effective instruments to sample or
evaluate media pluralism;
• Cross-country validity: avoiding indicators too idiosyncratic, i.e. measuring aspects of the functioning of a
media system that are either not applicable to all Member States, or have different meanings and impacts on the
level of media pluralism, depending on the country context and their different political and social structures;
• Update: following up on the need of a constant updating of the MPM (also recognised by the original
creators), the CMPF aimed at including new technologies and media developments that were not taken into full
consideration.

5. Media Pluralism Monitor
Pilot test implementation 2013-2014
Simplification
1) Narrowing the scope of application of the MPM: in line with
recent policies and academic trends, current MPM maintains only
indicators that fall under the general definition of “news” and
“current affairs”
2) Clustering the indicators according to more general
principles: due to the shared risk domain and overall similarity of
number of indicators, they were clustered where appropriate, in
order to improve the level of usability, especially of the results of
the MPM;
3) Simplifying the procedures to collect data: this principle is
applied in order to assure the applicability of the measurement
within the time and budget constraints of this project

6. Simplification
According to the three mentioned principles, the main simplifications
applied are:
• All the risk domains were simplified.
• The cultural risk domain is heavily reduced;
• Some sub-risks are not evaluated (es: Insufficient media
representation of European cultures, Insufficient media
representation of national culture, Insufficient proportion of
independent production, Insufficient proportion of in-house
production, Insufficient representation of world cultures,
Insufficient representation of the various cultural and social groups
in mainstream media content and services,Insufficient
representation of different cultural and social groups in HR in the
media sector)

7. Simplification
• Many of the indicators, relating to the same sub-domain risk,but referring to
different media platforms were merged in one indicator (see, for instance the
political communication indicators);
• New internet-related assessments were introduced as criteria to score the level of
a given risk;
• New internet-related indicators were introduced ex novo (see, for instance,
indicator n. 20 - Regulatory safeguards for the impartial transmission of
information in Internet, without regard to content, destination or source);
• Different types of media were grouped according to the logic of media
convergence (i.e. e-version of a newspaper is considered part of the general
definition of newspaper itself);
• The use of content analysis,as an instrument to collect data,has been heavily
reduced.
• As a result of this simplification the MPM indicators were reduced from 166
indicators to 34.

8. Risks
• B1-Freedom of speech and related rights and freedoms are not sufficiently protected
• B2-Insufficiently independent supervision in media sector
• B3-Insufficient media (including digital) literacy
• C1-Insufficient representation of the various cultural and social groups in PSM
• C2-Insufficient system of minority and community media
• C3-Limited accessibility by disabled people
• G1-Insufficient system of regional and local media
• G2-Insufficient representation of regional and local communities in news
• G3-Insufficient access to media and distribution systems due to geographic factors
• G4-High centralisation of the national media system
• O1-High ownership concentration in media
• O2-High concentration of cross-media ownership
• O3-Lack of transparency in ownership structures
• P1-Political bias in the media
• P2-Excessive politicisation of media functioning
• P3-Insufficient independence of PSM
• P4-Excessive politicisation and political control of media and media distribution networks
• P3-Insufficient independence of PSM
• P5-Insufficient pluralism of news agencies
• T1-Lack of/under-representation of/dominance of media types
• T2-Lack of sufficient resources to support public service media
• D1-Low accessibility and quality of the digital infrastructure

9. Scores
• Revision of the score grids.
• Scores have been adapted according to and in
parallel with the simplification and/or merging
operations.
• Re-balancing of the weight of “yes” and “no” in
scoring each legal indicators when necessary
• Assigning 1 as the value of each merged indicator
and defining three thresholds for high/medium
and low risk.

10. Media Pluralism Monitor
Pilot test implementation 2013-2014
Results MPM 2014: Simplification
- Narrowed MPM focus
- Tested the methodology of each indicator
- Tested their feasibility
- Tested their comparability across EU-MS
- Identified accountable national data sources

11. Media Pluralism Monitor
Pilot test implementation 2013-2014
Thanks !